Podcasts about Karen Horney

Czy język, którego używamy do codziennej komunikacji, może wykluczać i być narzędziem dyskryminacji? W tym odcinku zagłębiam się w analizy i rozważania na temat języka patriarchatu – tego, jak słowa, które wydają się neutralne, budują i podtrzymują nierówności. Dlaczego, kiedy mówimy „człowiek”, to statystycznie częściej widzimy mężczyznę, a nie kobietę? Jak to się stało, że język historycznie uprzywilejowywał męską perspektywę i spychał kobiety na margines? Opowiem Wam o literaturze, filmie i popkulturze pokażę jak słowa, mogą wzmacniać stereotypy i kontrolować narracje. Ten odcinek to podróż przez historie, badania i przykłady, które nie tylko otwierają oczy, ale też inspirują do myślenia o słowach jako narzędziach zmiany. Zapraszam do słuchania, bo język nie tylko opisuje, ale także kształtuje nasz świat. Subiektywna rekomendacja publikacji wymienionych w odcinku: Charlotte Brontë, Jane Eyre (1847) Lew Tołstoj, Anna Karenina (1877) William Szekspir, Hamlet (1599–1602) Sigmund Freud, Wstęp do psychoanalizy (1917) Karen Horney, Neurotyczna osobowość naszych czasów (1937) Mary Wollstonecraft, Vindication of the Rights of Woman (1792) Victoria L. Bergvall, Toward a Comprehensive Theory of Language and Gende (1999) Scott Kiesling, Men, Masculinities and Language (2007) Virginia Valian, Beyond Gender Schemas: Improving the Advancement of Women in Academia (2003)

La breve tappa di oggi si presenta come un approfondimento sul pensiero di Karen Horney, Theodore Millon e Otto Kernberg.Il viaggio che stiamo facendo insieme, ci sta portando alla scoperta delle perversioni e in particolare della storia che ha attraversato la strutturazione e la definizione del sadomasochismo. Prima di giungere alla definizione clinica del disturbo, al pensiero dell'italiano De Masi e alle ipotesi eziopatogenetiche, la tappa odierna fornisce una visione breve e chirurgica sul sadomasochismo stesso.Trova il tuo posto sull'aereo di #ilpensierononlineare e parti con me per una nuova tratta di In Viaggio Con La Psicologia.

Karen Horney's La Psychologie De La Femme

Kedudukan perempuan dimasyarakat saat ini lebih banyak dibentuk oleh strata sosial yang sudah lama mapan. --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/pebri-widianto/support

Welcome to the second episode in our discussion around communication. Last week's episode we discussed conflict styles and today we are discussing interaction styles. In this episode I'm exploring three distinct interaction styles: Assertive, Compliant, and Withdrawn. These can also be referred to Hornevian Groups, named after the influential psychologist Karen Horney, that categorize the nine Enneagram Types. You'll learn the key characteristics of each style (and how it shows up in each Enneagram Type), how they influence communication and relationships, and how to work with them.  Let me know what you think your dominant style of interaction is and what you learned in this podcast!   Episode links: Email Kelly: support@kellytravis.net Instagram Website She Doesn't Settle

Psicanalista neofreudiana, Horney questionava visões tradicionais de Freud e considerava fatores culturais e históricos ao identificar neuroses. Como muitas mulheres pioneiras de diversas áreas, seu nome ficou esquecido e vem sendo resgatado por novas gerações.

Welcome back to THE IAS COMPANION. Follow us on YouTube at ⁠www.youtube.com/@IASCompanion⁠. Today's lecture will delve into the psychoanalytical approach to psychology, exploring the foundational theories proposed by key figures such as Sigmund Freud, Karen Horney, Alfred Adler, Harry Stack Sullivan, and Erik Erikson. We will examine Freud's concepts of instincts, levels of consciousness, and psychosexual development; Horney's social-cultural approach emphasizing basic anxiety and personal growth; Adler's ideas on fictional finalism, striving for superiority, and the impact of birth order; Sullivan's interpersonal theory focusing on the influence of social relationships; and Erikson's psychosocial stages of development across the lifespan. Each theorist has significantly contributed to our understanding of personality and psychological development, and this lecture will provide a comprehensive overview of their impactful theories and critical evaluations. #UPSC #IASprep #civilserviceexam #IASexamination #IASaspirants #UPSCjourney #IASexam #civilservice #IASgoals #UPSC2024 #IAS2024 #civilservant #IAScoaching #aUPSCmotivation #IASmotivation #UPSCpreparation #IASpreparation #UPSCguide #IASguide #UPSCtips #IAS #UPSCbooks #IASbooks #UPSCexamstrategy #IASexamstrategy #UPSCmentorship #IASmentorship #UPSCcommunity #IAScommunity #UPSCpreparation #IASpreparation #UPSCguide #IASguide #UPSCtips #IAStips #UPSCbooks #IASbooks #UPSCexamstrategy #IASexamstrategy #UPSCmentorship #IASmentorship #UPSCcommunity #IAScommunity

Chapter 1 What's The Neurotic Personality of Our Time Book by Karen Horney"The Neurotic Personality of Our Time" is a book written by Karen Horney, a prominent psychoanalyst and feminist theorist. Published in 1937, the book explores the concept of neurosis and its underlying causes in contemporary society. According to Horney, neurosis arises from various conflicts and disturbances in one's personality, such as an excessive need for approval, an overwhelming desire for power, or an intense fear of abandonment. Horney discusses the impact of societal factors, cultural influences, and childhood experiences on the development of neurotic behaviors and patterns. By examining different neurotic styles, such as the aggressive or compliant type, Horney aims to shed light on the complexities of human personality and how it interacts with societal pressures.Chapter 2 Is The Neurotic Personality of Our Time Book A Good BookOpinions about books can vary greatly, so it is subjective whether "The Neurotic Personality of Our Time" by Karen Horney is a good book. However, the book is widely regarded as a classic in the field of psychology and has been highly influential for understanding and treating neuroticism. If you are interested in psychoanalytic theory and the study of personality, it could be a valuable read.Chapter 3 The Neurotic Personality of Our Time Book by Karen Horney Summary"The Neurotic Personality of Our Time" is a book written by Karen Horney, a prominent psychoanalyst, in 1937. In this book, Horney examines neurosis, a condition characterized by chronic psychological distress, and its underlying causes.Horney argues that neurotic individuals are profoundly affected by their deep-seated anxieties and insecurities. She suggests that these anxieties stem from early experiences of rejection or neglect in childhood, which leads to feelings of helplessness and a desperate need for love and approval. According to Horney, neurotics develop maladaptive defense mechanisms, such as aggression or withdrawal, in order to cope with these feelings.Horney also discusses how societal pressures and cultural norms contribute to the development of neurotic personalities. She explores the impact of competitive, individualistic societies on individuals' self-esteem and the resulting fear of failure or rejection.Furthermore, Horney introduces the concept of the "idealized self-image," which neurotics construct as a means to compensate for their underlying feelings of inadequacy. They strive for perfection and constantly compare themselves to others, leading to a perpetual cycle of dissatisfaction and self-criticism.In the later chapters of the book, Horney discusses various neurotic personality types, including the obsessive-compulsive, hysterical, and narcissistic personalities. She provides detailed case studies and analytical insights to illustrate her theoretical framework.Overall, "The Neurotic Personality of Our Time" offers a comprehensive analysis of neurosis and its psychological origins. Horney challenges conventional psychoanalytic theories of her time and offers a more humanistic approach to understanding neurotic individuals. The book remains highly influential in the field of psychology and continues to contribute to the understanding and treatment of neurotic behaviors. Chapter 4 The Neurotic Personality of Our Time Book AuthorKaren Horney was a German psychoanalyst and author, known for her contributions to the field of psychoanalysis and her unique perspective on personality development. She was born on...

Chapter 1 What's Self-Analysis Book by Karen HorneySelf-Analysis is a book written by Karen Horney, a prominent psychoanalyst and feminist thinker. Published in 1942, the book explores the process of self-analysis as a means to gain self-awareness and personal growth.Horney argues that self-analysis is a vital tool in understanding oneself and overcoming various psychological conflicts and distress. She emphasizes that individuals have a responsibility to examine their own thoughts, motivations, and behaviors to strive for personal fulfillment and a fulfilling life.In the book, Horney outlines several concepts and techniques to facilitate self-analysis. She explores the influence of childhood experiences, particularly in relation to relationships with parents and other influential figures. Horney also delves into the impact of cultural and societal pressures on individual development and people's aspirations.One of the central ideas in Self-Analysis is the concept of neurosis. Horney suggests that neurosis arises from various psychological conflicts, such as the clash between an individual's genuine self and the idealized self-image created by societal expectations. She emphasizes that self-analysis can help individuals identify and overcome these conflicts, leading to a more authentic and fulfilling existence.Moreover, Horney expands on the importance of self-expression and creativity in self-analysis. She argues that expressing oneself authentically and engaging in creative activities facilitate personal growth and a deeper understanding of oneself.Overall, Self-Analysis by Karen Horney provides a comprehensive exploration of the process of self-analysis, offering valuable insights and practical techniques for individuals seeking to gain self-awareness, overcome psychological conflicts, and ultimately achieve personal fulfillment.Chapter 2 Is Self-Analysis Book A Good Book"Self-Analysis" is a well-known book written by Karen Horney, a renowned psychoanalyst and one of the most influential figures in the field of psychology. The book was published in 1942, and it presents a self-help approach to self-analysis and personal growth.In the book, Horney outlines various techniques for self-reflection and self-understanding. She emphasizes the importance of examining one's own thoughts, emotions, and behaviors to gain insight into one's personal conflicts and create positive change.While the book is not as widely read or recognized as some other works in the field of psychology, it is still regarded as a valuable resource for self-reflection and personal development. Horney's approach combines psychoanalytic theory with a focus on interpersonal relationships, making it applicable to a wide range of readers.However, like any book, its utility and impact may vary depending on the reader's interests, preferences, and needs. If you are interested in exploring the topics of self-analysis and personal growth from a psychoanalytic perspective, "Self-Analysis" by Karen Horney could be worth considering.Chapter 3 Self-Analysis Book by Karen Horney SummaryKaren Horney was a psychoanalyst and feminist theorist who challenged the traditional Freudian view of psychoanalysis. In her book "Self-Analysis," Horney explores the concept of self-analysis and its potential for self-improvement and personal growth.The book begins with an introduction to the process of self-analysis and its importance in understanding one's own thoughts, emotions, and behavior. Horney emphasizes that self-analysis requires honesty, self-reflection, and a willingness to confront one's own fears and insecurities.Horney then delves into various aspects of self-analysis, including understanding one's...

I dag skal jeg snakke om mistillit. Jeg skal snakke om mennesker som av ulike årsaker ikke stoler på andre, og hvordan denne skepsisen spiller seg ut i relasjoner, fører til ensomhet og oversvømmer dem med stresshormoner som på sikt skader både den psykiske og den fysiske helsen.I boken “Our inner Conflicts” kaller Karen Horney dette psykologiske livsmønsteret for ”moving against people”. Personer som vokser opp i et miljø med uvennskap og krangling kompenserer for opplevelsen av mangel på trygghet på ulike måter. I denne kategorien finner vi de barna som mestret sin hverdag gjennom rebelsk oppførsel. Et anstrengt oppvekstmiljø fører til at de utvikler en grunnleggende skepsis i møte med andre. Noen møter verden med en mur av mistillit hvor de stadig forventer at andre har skjulte og lumske motiver. Deres grunnleggende innstilling er at verden er et fiendtlig sted, men en del av dem har utviklet en sosialt akseptabel ”takt og tone” som gjør at de omgås andre på en grei måte, så lenge den andre føyer seg og ikke uttrykker for mye motstand. Denne typen er like fryktsomme og usikre som den avhengige typen (som føyer seg etter andre for å ikke bli forlatt), men istedenfor å knytte seg til andre for å unngå følelsen av hjelpeløshet, har de valgt en annen vei. Her er det ”hver mann for seg selv” og verden er en usikker jaktmark hvor man skal overleve og vinne sine kamper. Denne personlighetstypen misliker svakhet, spesielt hos seg selv. De strever ofte hardt for å oppnå suksess, prestisje, status og anerkjennelse. Hvis man skal oppsummere denne psykologien i én setning, blir det omtrent slik: ”Ikke stol på noen og vær alltid på vakt”.I tidligere episoder her på SinnSyn har vi sett at mangel på tilhørighet, sosial tilbaketrekning, ensomhet og mellommenneskelig turbulens er forbundet med en rekke psykiske og fysiske plager. Når vi ikke har gode og stabil relasjoner, er vi på sett og vis i en livstruende situasjon. Vi er skapt for fellesskap, og når fellesskapet blir vanskelig eller utilgjengelig, er vi egentlig forlatt eller fortapt i en ganske farlig situasjon. Enten vi opplever det eller ikke, vil kroppen reagere med en fornyet alarmberedskap og økt nivå av stresshormonet kortisol og andrenalin. Over tid er det det forhøyede nivået av stresshormoner som krever såpass mye ressurser at andre vedlikeholdsoppgaver forsømmes og vi kan pådra oss alt fra hjerte- og karsykdommer, diabetes, overvekt, betennelser og et alvorlig svekket immunforsvar.Dagens episode skal handle om hvordan mistillit fører til ensomhet som igjen skader helsen vår på omfattende vis. Jeg skal starte med en studie fra noen tyske forskere som viser at kronisk ensomhet er forbundet med lavere tillit til andre. Det kan bety at samvær med andre oppleves som mindre positivt, noe som gjør det vanskelig å knytte seg til andre og komme seg ut av ensomhetsspiraler, og som nevnt er det ofte ensomhet som er den mest alvorlige driveren i veldig mange sykdomsbilder. Velkommen til en ny episode av SinnSyn.   Få tilgang til ALT ekstramateriale som medlem på SinnSyns Mentale Helsestudio via SinnSyn-appen her: https://www.webpsykologen.no/et-mentalt-helsestudio-i-lomma/ eller som Patreon-Medlem her: https://www.patreon.com/sinnsyn. For reklamefri pod og bonus-episoder kan du bli SinnSyn Pluss abonnent her https://plus.acast.com/s/sinnsyn. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Pierwsza część rozważań na temat założeń psychologii feministycznej. Czy prekursorką tej dziedziny psychologii była psychoanalityczka, Karen Horney? Czy sam nurt feminizmu w psychologii narodził się już wraz z pierwszymi psycholożkami uzyskującymi tytuły naukowe? Czy jego rozkwit przypadł na lata 60 i 70 XX wieku? Na te pytania postaram się odpowiedzieć w tym i kolejnych odcinkach cyklu. Będzie też sporo o krytyce i antyfeminizmie. Zapraszam!

Where Do Feelings Come From? Getting Unstuck from Apathy Ancient Stoic Philosophers--and More! Ask David Questions for Today Bystad: Why is it so helpful to write down your negative thoughts when you're upset? Anyinio: Do we have to have a thought every time we have an emotion? What if I see a car coming fast and about to hit me? Would I have to have a fast automatic thought? Raghav: How can I get unstuck from apathy? Anita: What are the necessary and sufficient conditions for emotional distress as well as escape from emotional distress? Louisa: Can you tell us some more about the ancient and modern Stoic philosophers who influenced the development of CBT and TEM-CBT? Answers to today's questions. The following answers were written before the podcast. The information on the podcast may be quite different in some cases, and will typically provide much more information than the brief answers below. David   Bystad asks: Why is it so helpful to write down your negative thoughts when you're upset? Dear David! I have practiced the paradoxical approach where I just write down my thougts / worries without challenging them. I think I learned that approach from your great book «When Panic Attacks». This is something that really works for me, especially for worries. It is almost like I «get the worries out of my head». Can you talk about this approach in your lovely podcast, why is it so effective for some people?? Best regards from Martin David's reply Great question. Will address it the next time we record an Ask David podcast!   Anyinio asks: Do you ALWAYS have a thought before you can experience an emotion / feeling? David's response The word “thought” is just a form of shorthand for perception. Perception can take many forms. When you see a car about to hit you, you already HAVE a negative and alarming thought! If you like, you can check out the railroad track story in my Feeling Good Handbook. It is a story about a man who became euphoric after his car was hit by a train going 60 MPH because of his thoughts about it! When a deer spots a pack of howling wolves, it runs in terror. It does not have a “thought” in English, but it DOES have the perception of being in imminent danger, and it DOES experience intense, sudden fear. However, the deer did NOT feel fear / anxiety until s/he SAW and correctly interpreted the pack of wolves. Thanks, best, david   Raghav asks: How can I get unstuck from apathy? Hi Dr. Burns, I hope you're doing well and thank you so much for all of your incredible work! It has really helped me pull myself out of some of the deepest depressions and anxieties I've had. I wanted to ask for your help with a problem I've been facing recently: I seem to get stuck in depressive cycles at times where I don't want to do a DML even though I know it will make me feel better. When I start doing the positive reframing, it helps melt away this resistance, but I still mope around for a while before I start the positive reframing. My thoughts during this time are generally “There's no point to getting better,” “Doing a DML is like forcing myself to cheer up,” “I should care about getting better more than I do right now,” and “There's no meaning to life.” How would you recommend I go about dealing with this apathetic state? I would greatly appreciate any help in this matter! Thanks, Raghav David's reply: You could perhaps list: All the really GOOD reasons NOT to do a DML. What the procrastination / avoidance shows about you and your core values that positive and awesome. How the avoidance helps you. Something along those lines. I might make this an Ask David question if that's okay with you. Could use your first name only, or a fake name if you prefer. Thanks! Good question, as so many can relate to it! Best, david Raghav's response to David Here's the answers I came up with: Good Reasons NOT to do a DML Doing a DML might be difficult and take a long time. I might not be able to answer some of my thoughts. Even if I do a DML, I might not be able to change my mood. Even if I change my mood, there's no point in being happy. There's no sense of meaning in doing a DML. It feels inauthentic to try to change my mood. Even if I do a DML now, I will return to this state again. Doing a DML is like forcing myself to cheer up and I don't want to be forced to do anything. I want to be able to get better without doing a DML. I might have to confront really negative and distressing thoughts. Core Values it shows about me I care about doing things successfully — I don't want to half-ass it. I want to put my best foot forward when doing tasks — i.e. not do them when I'm tired. I want to be self-reliant and be able to solve all my problems myself. I care about being able to change my mood. I care about having meaning in life. I care about being authentic to my emotional states — I can honor my apathetic/bored side. I can sit with my sadness and apathy rather than trying to escape it. I care about having lasting solutions rather than short-term fixes. I'm my own man — I'm not going to be forced to do something I don't want to do. I care about being able to deal with my emotional problems without “crutches.” How the Avoidance Helps Me It means that I don't have to do the hard work of doing a DML. I don't have to engage in the ups and downs of life if I'm apathetic/avoidant. I can keep engaging in avoidance and distracting myself. It feels like there are no consequences to my actions so I feel more free. I don't have to do the hard work required to build meaning into my life. I can fully engage and honor my apathy and boredom. I'll push myself to search for lasting solutions to my problems. It pushes me to improve my mental capabilities of solving my problems. It helps me avoid the pain and anguish of actually addressing really negative thoughts. It pushes me to find more interesting things to fill my life with. Raghav David's reply Great work, thanks! So now my question is this: Given all these positives, it is not clear to me why you'd want to do a DML. What's your thinking about this? Best, david    Anita asks about the necessary and sufficient conditions for emotional distress as well as escape from emotional distress? Dear David While revisiting Feeling Great I was thinking further about the interplay of necessary and sufficient conditions that are correlated to emotional distress. Necessary condition: You must have a negative thought Sufficient condition: You must believe in the negative thought I was thinking of another sufficient condition that may account for the behavioural component of emotional distress: Sufficient condition: You must act in way that reinforces your negative thought. For me this additional sufficient condition unlocks another philosophical underpinning why exposure is a key to overcoming anxiety. For example, if I have a negative thought I'm going to screw up in a presentation and then I believe it 100%. I can still summon up the courage to go ahead and do the presentation. Thus, I'm behaving in a way that doesn't fulfil the second sufficient condition, and therefore another way to reduce emotional distress. More often than not, the presentation is not as calamitous as I anticipated anyways. Thanks for reading. Warm Regards Anita David's reply Hi Anita, Great question, thanks. I greatly appreciate folks who think more deeply about these things. Exposure is a desirable tool in the treatment of anxiety, for sure, but if you point is “necessary and sufficient” for emotional distress, then the action thing is an unnecessary and erroneous, to my way of thinking, add-on. For example, many people who are severely depressed and believe themselves to be worthless do very little, and others do a great deal, but both feel the same severity of distress. Could we use this for an Ask David, with or without your first name? If so, we could also discuss the “necessary and sufficient” for emotional change. Here the sufficient condition is that you no longer believe  the negative thought, or your belief has gone down significantly. You can respond, too, if you like to my comments. Warmly, david Anita's Response to David Thanks David, sure I'd be pleased if you find any of what I wrote useful for your listeners. Feel free to use my first name. I'm also curious to know more about the depth of belief in a negative thought as a sufficient condition for emotional distress. Is there a particular intensity or tipping point that might lead to the emotional distress? David's Response: The greater you belief in a negative thought, the greater the emotional impact. There's no “tipping point.” I loved the premise of your book: “When you change the way you think, you can change the way you feel” It got me pondering about the possibility other things such as some behaviours in addition to thoughts that could be associated with emotional distress. David's Response: Your own or someone else's behaviour won't have any effect on you until you have a thought, or interpretation, of what's happening. This is the basic premise of CBT, going back 3500 years or more. An example I'm thinking of is workplace procrastination. Let's say I have been given two weeks to tackle a laborious project. I might initially have thoughts there is plenty of time and I can procrastinate for the first week doing things I find more satisfying at work. Towards the end of the second week, panic sets in as I rush through the project so I can still meet the deadline. After the event, I start ruminating and believing self-critical thoughts such as “I shouldn't have been so lazy” and “I'm never able to handle projects well.” Is it to say, the behaviours before the event has little to no bearing on the negative thoughts or belief after the event? And if so why is it really the case that the negative thinking comes into play after the event happens? David's Response: Negative thinking can happen before, during, or after an event. I really have gained much from many of your books. I'm inquiring to deepen and refine my own thought processes. Thankyou Warm Regards Anita David's Response Thanks so much for you kind and thoughtful comments.   Louisa asks: I'd like learn more about the ancient and modern Stoic philosophers who influenced the development of CBT and TEM-CBT. Hello Rhonda and David, I am a Belgium based listener thoroughly enjoying the podcast and sharing it far and wide! I love the TEAM CBT structured approach. I find in particular that many of the methods are (relatively) easy to remember and administering self-help feels much easier than I ever imagined. Well-done, David! I wonder if David could talk one time about the different influences various figures in the development of CBT right from its inception with (it seems to me) the Roman Stoics until this century. Some names that come to mind are Seneca, Epictetus, Marcus Aurelius, to Albert Ellis, Aaron Beck & William Glasser (these last three all since passed away.) Are they any particular names that stick out as having been particularly useful in the development of TEAM CBT and why or how? Do the Roman Stoics still have anything to offer us? Thanks for the great show! Louisa David's Response Hi Louisa, Thanks, will include in the list of questions for the next Ask David, depending on time constraints.  Best, david PS Albert Ellis documents much of the history in his book, Reason and Emotion in Psychotherapy. I believe that Karen Horney, the feminist psychiatrist of the first part of the 20 th century, discuss lots of the current ideas as well, especial the “need” for love, success, etc. and the idea that we have an “ideal” self and a “real” self. We get upset when we realize that the two don't match! David and Rhonda are grateful that Matt can join us often on the podcast.

If you're going through a divorce, you've likely fallen into what David Emerald Womeldorff calls the Dreaded Drama Triangle or DDT. But this framework keeps you and your ex focused on your problems rather than the outcomes you want. So, what is the antidote to the toxicity of DDT? How do you shift out of fear and reactivity into creativity and empowerment? David is the Creator-in-Chief of The Empowerment Dynamic and Cofounder of the Bainbridge Leadership Center. He is also the bestselling author many books, including The Power of TED: The Empowerment Dynamic. On this episode of Divorce Dialogues, David joins Katherine to explain the concept of the Dreaded Drama Triangle, exploring how the traditional approach to divorce perpetuates the DDT. David describes why we fall into the roles of victim, persecutor or rescuer in divorce and challenges us to leverage The Empowerment Dynamic as an antidote to DDT. Listen in for David's insight on applying TED to the circumstances of divorce and learn how to disrupt the pattern of DDT with or without your ex's cooperation! Topics Covered The concept of the Dreaded Drama Triangle (DDT) and how it works What differentiates victimhood from victimization How the traditional approach to divorce perpetuates the DDT Why we fall into our roles as victim, persecutor or rescuer in divorce How The Empowerment Dynamic (TED) serves as an antidote to the DDT The TED roles of creator, challenger and coach Why it's challenging to shift our focus from problems to outcomes David's insight on applying TED to the circumstances of divorce Disrupting the patten of DDT with or without your ex's cooperation Connect with David Emerald Womeldorff Center for the Empowerment Dynamic: https://theempowermentdynamic.com/#updates The Empowerment Dynamic on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/theempowermentdynamic David on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/david-emerald-womeldorff-bab4494/ Connect with Katherine Miller The Center for Understanding Conflict: http://understandinginconflict.org/ Miller Law Group: https://westchesterfamilylaw.com/ Katherine on LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/kemiller1 The New Yorker's Guide to Collaborative Divorce by Katherine Miller: https://www.amazon.com/New-Yorkers-Guide-Collaborative-Divorce/dp/0692496246 Email: katherine@miller-law.com Call (914) 738-7765 Resources The Power of TED: The Empowerment Dynamic by David Emerald: https://www.amazon.com/POWER-TED-EMPOWERMENT-DYNAMIC-Anniversary/dp/0996871802 The Karpman Drama Triangle: https://karpmandramatriangle.com/ Karen Horney's Interpersonal Theory of Adjustment: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34748442/ Oprah Interview with Adele: https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=432173685235996

Tomado del Libro de la Psicología de Wade Pickren. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/retornoalorden/message

“The years, of which I have spoken to you, when I pursued the inner images, were the most important time of my life. Everything else is to be derived from this. It began at that time, and the later details hardly matter anymore. My entire life consisted in elaborating what had burst forth from the unconscious and flooded me like an enigmatic stream and threatened to break me. That was the stuff and material for more than only one life. Everything later was merely the outer classification, the scientific elaboration, and the integration into life. But the numinous beginning, which contained everything, was then.”   ― C.G. Jung, preface for The Red Book: Liber Novus   James Hillman: I was reading about this practice that the ancient Egyptians had of opening the mouth of the dead. It was a ritual and I think we don't do that with our hands. But opening the Red Book seems to be opening the mouth of the dead.   Sonu Shamdasani: It takes blood. That's what it takes. The work is Jung's `Book of the Dead.' His descent into the underworld, in which there's an attempt to find the way of relating to the dead. He comes to the realization that unless we come to terms with the dead we simply cannot live, and that our life is dependent on finding answers to their unanswered questions. Lament for the Dead, Psychology after Jung's Red Book (2013) Pg. 1     Begun in 1914, Swiss psychologist Carl Jung's The Red Book lay dormant for almost 100 years before its eventual publication. Opinions are divided on whether Jung would have published the book if he had lived longer. He did send drafts to publishers early in life but seemed in no hurry to publish the book despite his advancing age. Regardless, it was of enormous importance to the psychologist, being shown to only a few confidants and family members. More importantly, the process of writing The Red Book was one of the most formative periods of Jung's life. In the time that Jung worked on the book he came into direct experience with the forces of the deep mind and collective unconscious. For the remainder of his career he would use the experience to build concepts and theories about the unconscious and repressed parts of the human mind.  In the broadest sense, Jungian psychology has two goals.    Integrate and understand the deepest and most repressed parts of the the human mind    and    Don't let them eat you alive in the process.    Jungian psychology is about excavating the most repressed parts of self and learning to hold them so that we can know exactly who and what we are. Jung called this process individuation. Jungian psychology is not, and should not be understood as, an attempt to create a religion. It was an attempt to build a psychological container for the forces of the unconscious. While not a religion, it served a similar function as a religion. Jungian psychology serves as both a protective buffer and a lens to understand and clarify the self. Jung described his psychology as a bridge to religion. His hope was that it could help psychology understand the functions of the human need for religion, mythology and the transcendental. Jung hoped that his psychology could make religion occupy a healthier, more mindful place in our culture by making the function of religion within humanity more conscious.    Jung did not dislike religion. He viewed it as problematic when the symbols of religion became concretized and people took them literally. Jungian psychology itself has roots in Hindu religious traditions. Jung often recommended that patients of lapsed faith return to their religions of origin. He has case studies encouraging patients to resume Christian or Muslim religious practices as a source of healing and integration. Jung did have a caveat though. He recommended that patients return to their traditions with an open mind. Instead of viewing the religious traditions and prescriptive lists of rules or literal truths he asked patients to view them as metaphors for self discovery and processes for introspection. Jung saw no reason to make religious patients question their faith. He did see the need for patients who had abandoned religion to re-examine its purpose and function.    The process of writing The Red Book was itself a religious experience for Jung. He realized after his falling out from Freud, that his own religious tradition and the available psychological framework was not enough to help him contain the raw and wuthering forces of his own unconscious that were assailing him at the time. Some scholars believe Jung was partially psychotic while writing The Red Book, others claim he was in a state of partial dissociation or simply use Jung's term “active imagination”.    The psychotic is drowning while the artist is swimming. The waters both inhabit, however, are the same. Written in a similar voice to the King James Bible, The Red Book has a religious and transcendent quality. It is written on vellum in heavy calligraphy with gorgeous hand illuminated script. Jung took inspiration for mystical and alchemical texts for its full page illustrations.   It is easier to define The Red Book by what it is not than by what it is. According to Jung, it is not a work of art. It is not a scholarly psychological endeavor. It is also not an attempt to create a religion. It was an attempt for Jung to heal himself in a time of pain and save himself from madness by giving voice to the forces underneath his partial psychotic episode. The Red Book was a kind of container to help Jung witness the forces of the deep unconscious. In the same way, religion and Jungian psychology are containers for the ancient unconscious forces in the vast ocean under the human psyche.     Lament of the Dead, Psychology after Carl Jung's The Red Book is a dialogue between ex Jungian analyst James Hillman and Jungian scholar Sonu Shamdasani about the implications the Red Book has for Jungian psychology. Like the Red Book it was controversial when it was released.    James Hillman was an early protege of Jung who later became a loud critic of parts of Jung's psychology. Hillman wanted to create an “archetypal” psychology that would allow patients to directly experience and not merely analyze the psyche. His new psychology never really came together coherently and he never found the technique to validate his instinct. Hillman had been out of the Jungian fold for almost 30 years before he returned as a self appointed expert advisor during the publication of The Red Book. Hillman's interest in The Red Book was enough to make him swallow his pride, and many previous statements, to join the Jungians once again. It is likely that the archetypal psychology he was trying to create is what The Red Book itself was describing.    Sonu Shamdasani is not a psychologist but a scholar of the history of psychology. His insights have the detachment of the theoretical where Hillman's are more felt and more intuitive but also more personal. One gets the sense in the book that Hillman is marveling painfully at an experience that he had been hungry for for a long time. The Red Book seems to help him clarify the disorganized blueprints of his stillborn psychological model. While there is a pain in Hillman's words there is also a peace that was rare to hear from such a flamboyant and unsettled psychologist.    Sonu Shamdasani is the perfect living dialogue partner for Hillman to have in the talks that make up Lament. Shamdasani has one of the best BS detectors of maybe any Jungian save David Tacey. Shamdasani has deftly avoided the fads, misappropriations and superficialization that have plagued the Jungian school for decades. As editor of the Red Book he knows more about the history and assembly of the text than any person save for Jung. Not only is he also one of the foremost living experts on Jung, but as a scholar he does not threaten the famously egotistical Hillman as a competing interpreting psychologist. The skin that Shamdasani has in this game is as an academic while Hillman gets to play the prophet and hero of the new psychology they describe without threat or competition.    Presumedly these talks were recorded as research for a collaborative book to be co authored by the two friends and the death of Hillman in 2011 made the publication as a dialogue in 2013 a necessity. If that is not the case the format of a dialogue makes little sense. If that is the case it gives the book itself an almost mystical quality and elevates the conversation more to the spirit of a philosophical dialogue.    We are only able to hear these men talk to each other and not to us. There is a deep reverberation between the resonant implications these men are seeing The Red Book have for modern psychology. However, they do not explain their insights to the reader and their understandings can only be glimpsed intuitively. Like the briefcase in the film Pulp Fiction the audience sees the object through its indirect effect on the characters. We see the foggy outlines of the ethics that these men hope will guide modern psychology but we are not quite able to see it as they see it. We have only an approximation through the context of their lives and their interpretation of Jung's private diary. This enriches a text that is ultimately about the limitations of understanding.   One of the biggest criticisms of the book when it was published was that the terms the speaker used are never defined and thus the book's thesis is never objectivised or clarified. While this is true if you are an English professor, the mystic and the therapist in me see these limitations as the book's strengths. The philosophical dialectic turns the conversation into an extended metaphor that indirectly supports the themes of the text. The medium enriches the message. Much like a socratic dialogue or a film script the the authors act more as characters and archetypes than essayists. The prophet and the scholar describe their function and limitations as gatekeepers of the spiritual experience.    Reading the Lament, much like reading The Red Book, one gets the sense that one is witnessing a private but important moment in time. It is a moment that is not our moment and is only partially comprehensible to anyone but the author(s). Normally that would be a weakness but here it becomes a strength. Where normally the reader feels that a book is for them, here we feel that we are eavesdropping through a keyhole or from a phone line downstairs. The effect is superficially frustrating but also gives Lament a subtle quality to its spirituality that The Red Book lacks.     Many of the obvious elements for a discussion of the enormous Red Book are completely ignored in the dialogue. Hillman and Shamdasani's main takeaway is that The Red Book is about “the dead”. What they mean by “the dead” is never explained directly. This was a major sticking point for other reviewers, but I think their point works better undefined. They talk about the dead as a numinous term. Perhaps they are speaking about the reality of death itself. Perhaps about the dead of history. Perhaps they are describing the impenetrable veil we can see others enter but never see past ourselves. Maybe the concept contains all of these elements. Hillman, who was 82 at the time of having the conversations in Lament, may have been using The Red Book and his dialogue with Shamdasani to come to terms with his feelings about his own impending death.    Perhaps it is undefined because these men are feeling something or intuitively, seeing something that the living lack the intellectual language for. It is not that the authors do not know what they are talking about. They know, but they are not able to completely say it.  Hillman was such an infuriatingly intuitive person that his biggest downfall in his other books is that he often felt truths that he could not articulate. Instead he retreated into arguing the merits of his credentials and background or into intellectual archival of his opinions on philosophers and artists. In other works this led to a didactic and self righteous tone that his writing is largely worse for. In Lament Hillman is forced to talk off the cuff and that limitation puts him at his best as a thinker.    In his review of Lament, David Tacey has made the very good point that Jung abandoned the direction that The Red Book was taking him in. Jung saw it as a dead end for experiential psychology and retreated back into analytical inventorying of “archetypes”. On the publication of The Red Book, Jungians celebrate the book as the “culmination” of Jungian thought when instead it was merely a part of its origins. The Red Book represents a proto-Jungian psychology as Jung attempted to discover techniques for integration. Hillman and Shamdasani probe the psychology's origins for hints of its future in Lament.   HIllman and Shamdasani's thesis is partially a question about ethics and partially a question about cosmology. Are there any universal directions for living and behaving that Jungian psychology compels us towards (ethics)? Is there an external worldview that the, notoriously phenomenological, nature of Jungian psychology might imply (cosmology)? These are the major questions Hillman and Shamdasani confront in Lament.Their answer is not an answer as much as it is a question for the psychologists of the future.    Their conclusion is that “the dead'' of our families, society, and human history foist their unlived life upon us. It is up to us, and our therapists, to help us deal with the burden of “the dead”. It is not us that live, but the dead that live through us. Hillman quotes W.H. Auden several times:   We are lived through powers that we pretend to understand.  - W.H. Auden   A major tenant of Jungian psychology is that adult children struggle under the unlived life of the parent. The Jungian analyst helps the patient acknowledge and integrate all of the forces of the psyche that the parent ran from, so they are not passed down to future generations. A passive implication of the ethics and the cosmology laid out in Lament, is that to have a future we must reckon with not only the unlived life of the parent but also the unlived life of all the dead.    It is our job as the living to answer the questions and face the contradictions our humanity posits in order to discover what we really are. The half truths and outright lies from the past masquerade as tradition for traditions sake, literalized religion, and unconscious tribal identity must be overthrown. The weight of the dead of history can remain immovable if we try to merely discard it but drowns us if we cling to it too tightly. We need to use our history and traditions to give us a container to reckon with the future. The container must remain flexible if we are to grow into our humanity as a society and an aware people.    If you find yourself saying “Yes, but what does “the dead” mean!”  Then this book is not for you. If you find yourself confused but humbled by this thesis then perhaps it is. Instead of a further explanation of the ethical and cosmological future for psychology that his book posits I will give you a tangible example about how its message was liberatory for me.    Hillman introduces the concepts of the book with his explanation of Jung's reaction to the theologian and missionary Albert Schweitzer. Jung hated Schweitzer.  He hated him because he had descended into Africa and “gone native”. In Jung's mind Schweitzer had “refused the call”  to do anything  and “brought nothing home”. Surely the Africans that were fed and clothed felt they had been benefited! Was Jung's ethics informed by racism, cluelessness, arrogance or some other unknown myopism? A clue might be found in Jung's reaction to modern art exploring the unconscious or in his relationship with Hinduism. Jung took the broad strokes of his psychology from the fundamentals of the brahman/atman and dharma/moksha dichotomies of Hinduism. Jung also despised the practice of eastern mysticism practices by westerners but admired it in Easterners. Why? His psychology stole something theoretical that his ethics disallowed in direct practice.    Jung's views on contemporary (modern) artists of his time were similar. He did not want to look at depictions of the raw elements of the unconscious. In his mind discarding all the lessons of classicism was a “cop out”.  He viewed artists that descended into the abstract with no path back or acknowledgement of the history that gave them that path as failures. He wanted artists to make the descent into the subjective world and return with a torch of it's fire but not be consumed by it blaze. Depicting the direct experience of the unconscious was the mark of a failed artist to Jung. To Jung the destination was the point, not the journey. The only thing that mattered is what you were able to bring back from the world of the dead. He had managed to contain these things in The Red Book, why couldn't they? The Red Book was Jung's golden bough.    Jung took steps to keep the art in The Red Book both outside of the modernist tradition and beyond the historical tradition. The Red Book uses a partially medieval format but Jung both celebrates and overcomes the constraints of his chosen style. The Red Book was not modern or historical, it was Jung's experience of both. In Lament, Hillman describes this as the ethics that should inform modern psychology. Life should become ones own but part of ones self ownership is that we take responsibility for driving a tradition forward not a slave to repeating it.   Oddly enough the idea of descent and return will already be familiar to many Americans through the work of Joseph Campbell. Campbell took the same ethics of descent and return to the unconscious as the model of his “monomyth” model of storytelling. This briefly influenced psychology and comparative religion in the US and had major impact on screenwriters to this day. Campbells ethics are the same as Jung's. If one becomes stuck on the monomyth wheel, or the journey of the descent and return, one is no longer the protagonist and becomes an antagonist.  Campbell, and American post jungians in general were not alway great attributing influences and credit where it was due.    Jung was suspicious of the new age theosophists and psychadelic psychonauts that became enamored with the structure of the unconscious for the unconscious sake. Where Lament shines is when Hillman explains the ethics behind Jung's thinking. Jung lightly implied this ethics but was, as Hillman points out, probably not entirely conscious of it. One of Lament's biggest strengths and weaknesses is that it sees through the misappropriations of Jungian psychology over the last hundred years. Both of the dialogue's figures know the man of Jung so well that they do not need to address how he was misperceived by the public. They also know the limitations of the knowable.    This is another lesson that is discussed in Lament. Can modern psychology know what it can't know? That is my biggest complaint with the profession as it currently exists. Modern psychology seems content to retreat into research and objectivism. The medical, corporate, credentialist and academic restructuring of psychology in the nineteen eighties certainly furthered that problem. Jung did not believe that the descent into the unconscious without any hope of return was a path forward for psychology. This is why he abandoned the path The Red Book led him down. Can psychology let go of the objective and the researchable enough to embrace the limits of the knowable? Can we come to terms with limitations enough to heal an ego inflated world that sees no limits to growth?   I don't know but I sincerely hope so.    I said that I would provide a tangible example of the application of this book in it's review,  so here it is:   I have always been enamored with James Hillman. He was by all accounts a brilliant analyst. He also was an incredibly intelligent person. That intellect did not save him. Hillman ended his career as a crank and a failure in my mind. In this book you see Hillman contemplate that failure. You also see Hillman attempt to redeem himself as he glimpses the unglimpseable. He sees something in the Red Book that he allows to clarify his earlier attempt to revision psychology.    Hillman's attempt to reinvent Jungian psychology as archetypal psychology was wildly derided. Largely, because it never found any language or technique for application and practice. Hillman himself admitted that he did not know how to practice archetypal psychology. It's easy to laugh at somebody who claims to have reinvented psychology and can't even tell you what you do with their revolutionary invention.   However, I will admit that I think Hillman was right. He knew that he was but he didnt know how he was right. It is a mark of arrogance to see yourself as correct without evidence. Hillman was often arrogant but I think here he was not. Many Jungian analysts would leave the Jungian institutes through the 70, 80s and 90s to start somatic and experiential psychology that used Jung as a map but the connection between the body and the brain as a technique. These models made room for a direct experience in psychology that Jungian analysis does not often do. It added an element that Jung himself had practiced in the writing of The Red Book. Hillman never found this technique but he was correct about the path he saw forward for psychology. He knew what was missing.    I started Taproot Therapy Collective because I felt a calling to dig up the Jungian techniques of my parent's generation and reify them. I saw those as the most viable map towards the future of psychology, even though American psychology had largely forgotten them. I also saw them devoid of a practical technique or application for a world where years of analysis cost more than most trauma patients will make in a lifetime. I feel that experiential and brain based medicine techniques like brainspotting are the future of the profession.    Pathways like brainspotting, sensorimotor therapy, somatic experiencing, neurostimulation, ketamine, psilocybin or any technique that allows the direct experience of the subcortical brain is the path forward to treat trauma. These things will be at odds with the medicalized, corporate, and credentialized nature of healthcare. I knew that this would be a poorly understood path that few people, even the well intentioned, could see. I would never have found it if I had refused the call of “the dead”.    Lament is relevant because none of those realizations is somewhere that I ever would have gotten without the tradition that I am standing on top of. I am as, Isaac Newton said, standing on the shoulders of giants. Except Isaac Newton didn't invent that phrase. It was associated with him but he was standing on the tradition of the dead to utter a phrase first recorded in the medieval period. The author of its origin is unknown because they are, well, dead. They have no one to give their eulogy.    The ethics and the cosmology of Lament, is that our lives are meant to be a eulogy for our dead. Lament, makes every honest eulogy in history become an ethics and by extension a cosmology. Read Pericles eulogy from the Peloponesian war in Thucydides. How much of these lessons are still unlearned? I would feel disingenuous in my career unless I tell you who those giants are that I stand on. They are David Tacey, John Beebe, Sonu Shamdasani, Carl Jung, Fritz Perls, Karen Horney, and Hal Stone. Many others also.   I would never have heard the voice of James Hillman inside myself unless I had learned to listen to the dead from his voice beyond the grave. It would have been easy for me to merely critize his failures instead of seeing them as incomplete truths. Hillman died with many things incomplete, as we all inevitably will. Lament helped me clarify the voices that I was hearing in the profession. Lament of the Dead is a fascinating read not because it tells us exactly what to do with the dead, or even what they are. Lament is fascinating because it helps us to see a mindful path forward between innovation and tradition.    The contents of the collective unconscious cannot be contained by one individual. Just as Jungian psychology is meant to be a container to help an individual integrate the forces of the collective unconscious, attention to the unlived life of the historical dead can be a kind of container for culture. Similarly to Jungian psychology the container is not meant to be literalized or turned into a prison. It is a lens and a buffer to protect us until we are ready and allow us to see ourselves more clearly once we are. Our project is to go further in the journey of knowing ourselves where our ancestors failed to. Our mindful life is the product of the unlived life of the dead; it is the work of our life that is their lament.   

We are clearly in a day that majors in fulfilling the prophecy of 2 Timothy 4:3-4. “For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.” Examples abound. Many churches that profess to be Bible-believing fellowships do not live up to their claims. They say they believe in the inerrancy, the authority, and the sufficiency of the Word of God. However, in practice they have mixed what God has said with the so-called wisdom of mankind. Here's how that plays out, starting with the sufficiency of the Scriptures. The evangelical church is a major referral source for the mental health community. More often than not, Christians dealing with mental and emotional problems are referred to psychological counselors by their pastors, especially to so-called Christian psychologists. This is a field that attempts to integrate secular psychological concepts with biblical teachings. As I mentioned last month, the foundational concepts are drawn from the theories of Sigmund Freud, Carl Jung, Abraham Maslow, Carl Rogers, and to them we could add Karen Horney, Elisabeth Kubler-Ross, and many of their disciples. All such theories are antichrist at best.

We are clearly in a day that majors in fulfilling the prophecy of 2 Timothy 4:3-4. “For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.” Examples abound. Many churches that profess to be Bible-believing fellowships do not live up to their claims. They say they believe in the inerrancy, the authority, and the sufficiency of the Word of God. However, in practice they have mixed what God has said with the so-called wisdom of mankind. Here's how that plays out, starting with the sufficiency of the Scriptures.The evangelical church is a major referral source for the mental health community. More often than not, Christians dealing with mental and emotional problems are referred to psychological counselors by their pastors, especially to so-called Christian psychologists. This is a field that attempts to integrate secular psychological concepts with biblical teachings. As I mentioned last month, the foundational concepts are drawn from the theories of Sigmund Freud, Carl Jung, Abraham Maslow, Carl Rogers, and to them we could add Karen Horney, Elisabeth Kubler-Ross, and many of their disciples. All such theories are antichrist at best.

We are clearly in a day that majors in fulfilling the prophecy of 2 Timothy 4:3-4. “For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.” Examples abound. Many churches that profess to be Bible-believing fellowships do not live up to their claims. They say they believe in the inerrancy, the authority, and the sufficiency of the Word of God. However, in practice they have mixed what God has said with the so-called wisdom of mankind. Here's how that plays out, starting with the sufficiency of the Scriptures.The evangelical church is a major referral source for the mental health community. More often than not, Christians dealing with mental and emotional problems are referred to psychological counselors by their pastors, especially to so-called Christian psychologists. This is a field that attempts to integrate secular psychological concepts with biblical teachings. As I mentioned last month, the foundational concepts are drawn from the theories of Sigmund Freud, Carl Jung, Abraham Maslow, Carl Rogers, and to them we could add Karen Horney, Elisabeth Kubler-Ross, and many of their disciples. All such theories are antichrist at best.

Karen Horney was a German psychoanalyst. Her career came into prominence in the nineteen twenties when she formed theories on human attachment and neurosis that split from Freud's key ideas. Horney's theory of personality development and individuation are still highly relevant to modern theories of personality, attachment psychology and psychological trauma. Even though she is not well remembered, her work is as relevant as it was at the turn of the century. Applying her theories to my work with patients and to my own life has been an integral piece of my own personal and professional development. This article is part one of four in a series explaining Horney's theories. At the time of this writing my daughter is two. Sometimes when my wife and I relax slightly in public, she will get a glimmer in her eye and, starting to giggle, run away from us. While we will yell for her to stop, she will cackle drunk with her new found power, as she runs away into a crowd of strangers or into oncoming traffic. When we take her to school or to meet new people she wraps herself around my wife's leg, pressing her cheek into my wife's calf, and refuses to Speak. Two year old children cannot understand moderation or limitation. They demand to have “more food” even when their plate is overflowing. Minutes later they will refuse to eat another bite because they are “full”. They cannot understand shades of gray. They refuse to believe that they need a nap until their eyes are closing. People are either all “bad guys” or all “good guys”. Individual children live in a world of extremes with tunnel vision on their immediate present desires and realities. Infants do not understand that they are separate creatures from their mother. The first traumatic event in an infant's life is the separation from the mother as the infant becomes a toddler. Infants are connected to the mother for so much of their post birth experience. In order to soothe infants we try to make them feel as though they are still in the womb. We swaddle infants, keep them warm, and play white noise. The mother is both their source of physical comfort and nourishment. So much of the infant's conscious experience is centered on its connection to its mother, that it makes sense that infants would lack the ability to understand what they are outside of the central reality of their experience. For the nine months in the womb an infant is physically and psychologically dependent on its mother. It takes at least one and a half years after being born for infants to begin to piece together that they will have to eventually become something separate from their mother. Because infants cannot understand their existence without their mother, this means that when they are inevitably forced to separate from their mother, infants feel like their existence is under threat. The necessary task of the mother is to separate the child from herself into itself. Yet, this feels to the child like it is being obliterated. This is often the first major trauma of a child's life. Karen Horney's theory of personality and neurosis is built on examining its effect on an infant's development. When toddlers begin to be separated from their mothers they experience moments where they, like my daughter, think they are God and can run through traffic. They are completely independant, completely free, can do things “by themself”, and will never need supervision or approval from parents again. They quickly alternate into periods of abject terror where they are horrified with their agency as an independent being and, often wrapping themselves around her leg, attempt to remerge with their mother. The distinction between infant and toddler is between a creature that can not live independently and a creature that sometimes thinks it can. Toddlers alternate between rejecting all authority to become a god and trying to crawl back into the womb in order to forget they exist. Our ego is what allows us to navigate the overwhelming forces of the unconscious. The ego allows us to accept both our autonomy and reconcile our own ultimate insignificance. Toddlers are just beginning to develop an ego that will synthesize these competing, and contradictory realities. As a trauma therapist I use Horney's theories constantly. The connection between the way that our parents give us attention and the way we learn to get attention from others in later life is endlessly relevant in many types of therapy, especially work with trauma. In Horney's theory of neurosis, the way that a child individuates from their mother determines their coping style and predicts many of the psychological issues they may develop in later life. Moving Towards People Karen Horney was a German psychoanalyst. Her career came into prominence in the nineteen twenties when she formed theories on human attachment and neurosis that split from Freud's key ideas. Horney's theory of personality development and individuation are still highly relevant to modern theories of personality, attachment psychology and psychological trauma. Horney observed that children deploy three different coping styles during the time they are individuating from the mother. Ideally children learn mastery in the three different styles. In imperfect situations infants become over dependent in one style and form a neurotic and rigid personality style. This second part of a four part article will explore the moving towards people personality style. The first coping strategy that children will attempt in order to retain the connection with the mother during individuation is to ask for help Horney called this stage moving towards people. As infants we cry in order to make our mothers come running to our aid. If our mother's continue to come running to our aid for the rest of childhood however, this can impair our development as we fail to learn to solve our own problems internally or assert ourselves. In extreme cases where mothers will not separate from a child to allow room for experimentation with assertive aggression or self soothing behavior the child becomes neurotic and co-dependant in the moving towards people style. People and characters with this level of impairment see the entire world in terms of their mother and never learn to make their own judgements or form their own values. What would mother think of this? That is against mother's rules. Another force like a charismatic leader, romantic partner or social identity may replace the actual mother at some point, but the inability to be a separate person will remain. Persons over dependent on another person or group's ego have no ability to self soothe without the warm glow of the surrogate mother's approval and ability to define rules and worth. Horney calls this neurosis the need for affection and approval. The sense of self in people with this personality type is incredibly diffuse as they are not able to watch others withdraw their approval even for good reason. The psychologist Albert Ellis used to tell his patients that “It is pathological to want to be liked by everybody all the time”. I often tell mine that “There are times when the loving or the honest thing to do is to piss someone off”. When we cannot stand to see our standards judged by other people it means that we cannot have a stable sense of self with authentic standards for self worth. This need often manifests as a form of codependency in relationships or friendships as people try to replace the stabilizing presence of a controlling caregiver with a different set of rules and boundaries. We learn to tolerate the anxiety of not knowing what to do and being forced to choose early in life. When we have not been allowed to adapt to making small choices over the life course we decompensate in the face of larger overwhelming choices about our life and Identity. In therapy I encounter patients who have had a controlling caregiver, and a corresponding inability to develop their own sense of identity. I start by asking them simple questions about who they are. Patients with an underdeveloped sense of personal identity will often have no idea what their basic preferences and beliefs are. Often they will have found an abusive partner or a rigid social, political, or religious group to fill up the “blank” spaces in their identity with. In healthy partnerships we are allowed to maintain our own sense of identity while still participating in a group affiliation or romantic partnership. I always frame the therapy with these patients as an exciting adventure that we are going on together. We are going to discover who the patient is and who they want to become. Patients of this coping style often will try and figure out what the therapist wants them to do and what the “new rules” that the therapist has for their life are. Their primary fear is that they will do something “wrong” and don't know what the “right” answers are to their life questions. I tell patients that “You are the only best expert in how to be you”. While the freedom and gray area of this kind of personality development therapy is initially terrifying to patients, eventually this style of therapy becomes exhilarating as patients reconnect to a long absent sense of self. Even though patients present to therapy blank and indifferent about their, often abusive and traumatic history, they will start to recognize moments in the past when they had a strong emotion or a preference that was dismissed by a caregiver or a partner. “I was so angry that my clothes were picked out for me every day”. “I was told that good christians don't go to prom”. Not all people in the moving towards people neurotic type will use a partner to try and complete their functioning. Oftentimes I have patients with social and intellectual gifts that use admiration, fame or envy in order to move towards people. Many people seek fame or attention, but those with a moving towards people neurosis will not be able to function without admiration of others. These patients are not able to determine the value or morality of their behavior without group approval. Moving Against People Karen Horney was a German psychoanalyst. Her career came into prominence in the nineteen twenties when she formed theories on human attachment and neurosis that split from Freud's key ideas. Horney's theory of personality development and individuation are still highly relevant to modern theories of personality, attachment psychology and psychological trauma. This third part of a four part article will explore the moving against people personality style. In Horney's theory of individuation, the individuating child will settle into one of three different personality styles based on what allows it to successfully reclaim its parent's attention. The first style that children try is the moving towards people style. This is most familiar to the child since this is the style they are accustomed to using in infancy. If this asking for attention and attempting to be close to the mother through affection fail, the child will next try aggression in order to force it's caregiver to give it what it wants. If only aggression is effective the child will settle firmly into a moving against people personality style. People in the moving against people personality style had sporadic or unpredictable affection offered to them as children. They came from environments that were hostile or uncaring and handled the fundamental insecurity that these environments engendered by becoming aggressive. They never had the option of asking for the basic attention children need and instead learned to demand attention. Caregivers were neglectful and unresponsive until these fought for the little affection or attention available in their home. This reality in their family of origin colors these patient's interpersonal style and assumptions about the world. These assumptions about others and the world are immediately recognizable in the first few minutes of the first therapy session when a patient in the moving against people personality style presents to therapy. Patients in the moving against people personality style are not likely to come to therapy and do not usually present to therapy until they are in crisis or are facing significant personal or professional losses due to their rigidity. Just as patients in the moving towards people personality type often have anger turned off, patients in the moving against people personality type are often out of touch with their ability to feel hurt or vulnerable. To ward this feeling off patients in theis personality style develop a “don't mess with me” defensive posture. They may use wit as a weapon becoming acerbically funny. They maybe overly macho or simply act like they don't care what anyone thinks. Most often patients who are neurotic in the moving against people personality style are highly competitive and motivated to dominate athletics, group functions and professional environments. Patients in this style are often high achievers when they are skilled. They are seen as invulnerable at work but often feel hollow in personal spheres. They are unable to understand the point of life without comparison and competition. Patients often present to therapy in middle age when there is “nothing else left to win”. Moving Away From People Karen Horney was a German psychoanalyst. Her career came into prominence in the nineteen twenties when she formed theories on human attachment and neurosis that split from Freud's key ideas. Horney's theory of personality development and individuation are still highly relevant to modern theories of personality, attachment psychology and psychological trauma. Horney observed that children deploy three different coping styles during the time they are individuating from the mother. Ideally children learn mastery in the three different styles. In imperfect situations infants become over dependent in one style and form a neurotic and rigid personality style. This second part of a four part article will explore the moving away from people personality style.  Horney's three neurotic personality styles can most simply be understood as dependency (moving towards people), Aggression (moving against people) and resignation (moving away from people). The resigned type is the result of the developing child discovering that they are unable to get the attention of the parent either through asking for attention or demanding it. The child then retreats into an innerworld where it creates its own systems of psychological reward through creativity and self expansion. If you are a writer or a psychotherapist it is highly likely that you are strongly developed in this area even if you are not quite a neurotic! The ability to move into your head and create your own rules and concepts for life is a useful skill, but not one we learn from asking or demanding attention from our parents. These personality types are more able to see through the arbitrary nature of the rules or traditions in a society, and have less attachment to the cultural rules. Unless these children develop ways of communicating these inner worlds they can seem “spacey” or “lost in their thoughts”. All of the neuroses that Horeney observes can be understood as the limiting conditions that a person with insecure attachment has for being safe. The dependent type needs others to feel safe, while the aggressive type needs control. A person in the “moving away from people” neurotic type only feels safe when some inner condition of solitude or independance has been fulfilled. This ultimate value of independence can present in several ways. Some want to be invisible, living an unassuming and private life. Sometimes the fixation on independence manifests and living off the land, being wealthy, and sometimes as being emotionally independent. Patients in this style may emulate, Jay Gatsby, Jeremiah Johnson or John Wayne. The moving away from people's personality type is not comfortable unless they are absolutely independent in some special area. While the moving towards people type needs people in order to function, and the moving against people personality type needs people in order to become dominant, the moving away from people type feels unsafe if it needs people for anything substantial. This does not mean that they are unsuccessful socially, only that they are uncomfortable with relying on social or emotional ties to others in order to feel stable. This type failed to maintain a connection with their mother through either dependence seeking or aggressive behaviors.  They learned to soothe themselves and learned their own coping skills. This process of learning to regulate ones own emotions as a child without assistance leads children into their own head where they develop a large and elaborate inner world. Children become less interested or even aware of external realities like norms, socially, or practical tasks. Instead of learning to manage their feelings they become fascinated with them.  Moving away from people personality type patients have a unique knack for encoding their beliefs, personality and opinions into artistic creations because they crave the recognition and understanding that was denied them by their caregivers as children. Art, humor, fashion, business even, is a way of communicating something about the hidden self to others.    

"In der zweiten Hälfte des letzten Jahrhunderts sind Menschen wie C. G. Jung, Fritz Pearls, Carl Rogers, Karen Horney und Leeland Johnson auf dem Weg gewesen, ihre Psychotherapie so zu entwickeln, dass sie zur Erleuchtung führt."

"If you want to be proud of yourself, then do things in which you can take pride."- Karen Horney. Contact me at WLOAP.com --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/wloap/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/wloap/support

This week, the gals are talking about Karen Horney, a Neo-Freudian who fought back against some of Freud's wackier ideas and ended up influencing a lot of other theorists. First, Anna chats about Karen's history and career — including how she was kicked out of the psychoanalysis boy's club and started her own place. Next Bonnie talks theory, exploring the ten (and then later, three) different kinds of neuroses that Karen identified, along with her ideas about basic anxiety and how it all relates to a person's relationships with their parents and society.

Research using the Adult Attachment Interview (AAI) has found a relationship between the early attachment experiences of parents and the attachment patterns of their children (van Ijzendoorn, 1997). There are different theories of attachment and the style of connecting to people as a baby that affects human being's relationships in adulthood. Karen Horney Research using the Adult Attachment Interview (AAI) has found a relationship between the early attachment experiences of parents and the attachment patterns of their children (van Ijzendoorn, 1997). There are different theories of attachment and the style of connecting to people as a baby that affects human being's relationships in adulthood. Karen Horney

In this episode of the podcast, we discuss the work of Karen Horney, M.D., titled, Neurosis and Human Growth: The Struggle Towards Self Realization. In the book, Horney discusses the concept of neurosis as it stands juxtaposed against what she deems healthy growth and human development. We will be discussing this concept and some of her prevalent theories introduced in the writing, such as the development of neurosis, the contrast to the healthy individual, the components of growth, the tyranny of the “should,” the search for glory, and neurotic claims.   We hope that you will be inspired to pick up this book by Karen Horney and join us in thinking about her important work.

In this highlight from the show, Dr. Cloud talks about our automatic tendencies in conflicts. Our default tendencies aren't always so productive, fruitful or stellar. Sometimes they stem from conflicts or trauma and often do us a disservice. Dr. Cloud talks Dr. Karen Horney's way of breaking down these tendencies into categories. Our automatic tendencies fall into one of three modes: Moving Towards, Moving Against, and Moving Away. The first step is figuring out what your default tendency is, and then making a thoughtful decision about whether that's the appropriate way for you to respond to your situation.   Got a narcissist in your life? Not sure what to do? Then you're in luck! We have an upcoming workshop on Narcissism on June 28th at 5pm Pacific! If you can't attend live, don't worry, you can stream the recording as much as you like. To find out more about it go to Boundaries.me/Narcissism.   Get a free 14 day trial to Boundaries.me with over 90 video courses, daily coaching emails and more. We've got courses on codependency, finding safe people, dealing with a narcissist, and over 90 other courses. You'll also get daily coaching videos delivered to your inbox--short 2-4 minute videos that give you one thing to do that day to build your way to a better version of yourself. We've also got a members-only support community on the site where you can discuss what you're learning, and get support and share support along the way. It's a free two-week trial, cancel at anytime, and only $9 a month after that. https://www.boundaries.me

Welcome to the World Extreme Medicine podcast….. In this conversation we are talking with Steve Wood the vice president of Delivery for Personal Strengths (UK) and is a facilitator, trainer and senior manager within the core strength group. He has extensive experience of developing and facilitating training focusing on leadership, team dynamics, conflict management and personal development. Steve has worked in partnership with a number of the UK's largest organisations in developing and delivering programmes that provide a lasting difference to both individuals and the business. We will start with the history and background of the SDI which originated from Prominent psychologist Elias Porter a peer of Carl Rogers. Elias was the author of ‘Introduction to Therapeutic Counselling and Manpower Development' and developed the ‘Relationship Awareness Theory' which is one of the pivotal theories used by the SDI. We will examine some of his key influencers those of Sigmund Freud, Erich Fromm, Karen Horney, Erik Erickson, Kurt Lewin and, Carl Rogers. In this conversation we are going to examine, why personality profiling – why and how is it useful? What the SDI is and how it can help increase self-awareness, and how it can benefit us imm every domain of life.

Tomado de El Libro de la Psicología (Ed. DK).

This episode of Living Myth begins with the deepening of the war in Ukraine and the growing sense of anxiety in the world. Michael Meade turns to depth psychology to consider instinctive ways of coping with insecurity, uncertainty and the tragedies of life.   "If a person wishes to be sure of the road they tread, they must close their eyes and walk in the dark." That statement comes from St. John of the Cross, who also coined the phrase “the dark night of the soul.” Often, I wake up thinking about the hordes of people who now find themselves treading through darkness, like those caught in the ever-deepening tragedy of the war in Ukraine.   An old tension exists between the presence of tragedy and the loss of innocence. And there's a way in which this clearly unnecessary, coldly destructive and brutal war enacts a daily assault on human innocence. When the Russian army heavily bombed a maternity hospital, people all over the world saw images of a very pregnant mother being hurriedly carried through smoking rubble on a makeshift stretcher. The sense of tragedy deepened when desperate attempts to save the mother failed and both innocent lives were lost.   At times, I try to turn away from the ongoing tragedy, but mostly I cannot manage to turn away. It's as if averting my eyes might add to the anguish and abandonment of all those who are suffering. Part of me wants to see all the video clips of the thousands and thousands of children being hurried fearfully into an unknown, uncertain future. And part of me wants to witness with my own eyes the filling in of mass graves in the city of Mariupol, where an actual witness said that “the land is now soaked in blood, bitterness, and despair.”   When I do close my eyes, I continue to see some of the tragic images. I also see and feel the darkness that fell over me and our country during the Vietnam War. I was torn open at that time and become torn again each time an unjustified war turns the living world upside down. When I hear the dark propaganda and the massive misinformation coming out of Russia, I viscerally remember the distortions and lies used to deny the actual death tolls and the massive destruction unleashed during the Vietnam era.   To this day, I feel compelled to witness war coverage and often fail to know when I've seen enough or how I might find a way of withdrawing and escaping the numbing presence of mindless war. Yesterday, I was at the point of feeling torn between witnessing and turning away when an interview with a Ukrainian man, who lives in war torn Ukraine but is Russian in origin, caught my full attention. He spoke passionately about trying to inform his parents in Russia about the horrors of Putin's war. He then described how distressing and enraging it was to have his own parents tell him that he was not telling the truth when he described all of the destruction and unnecessary death that is tearing Ukraine apart.   His parents get their news from Russian state television and believe that the Russian army entered Ukraine to drive the Nazis out and create humanitarian corridors to safety. After expressing outrage about the fact that the Russian army had actually attacked those trying to use the humanitarian corridors, his passion shifted to a sense of compassion for those trapped under the spell of many years of propaganda.   He explained that he came to realize how important it remains, for both Ukrainian and Russian people, that he and others find ways to communicate the ongoing tragedy to their parents and older relatives. He described how they were continuing to reach out and expressed genuine hope that the Russian people could awaken from the heavy spell of propaganda. I found myself released from the immediate tensions and searing presence of the war. I also realized why Karen Horney's theories about human anxiety and instinctive coping strategies had been on my mind.       Horney was an early follower of Sigmund Freud, but broke away in order to consider the psychology of infants and parents, which she thought had a great bearing on how we cope with fears and anxiety later in life. She suggests that each infant must develop a strategy for coping with “basic anxiety.” She also argues that we tend to use the same coping strategy from our infancy when we encounter crises later in life. In other words, there is a psychological connection between intense fears and anxieties that overtake us in life, and the way we survived traumas early on.   A big surprise came when Horney pointed to “parental indifference” as the root cause of basic anxiety early in each life, but also a key factor in neurotic conditions later in life. A child doesn't have to be treated harshly or be severely rejected in order to experience anxiety and insecurity at a basic level. Indifference on the part of parents at critical points is enough to trigger a deep sense of anxiety that seems to be an inevitable human condition.   That kind of parental indifference seemed to be present in the experience of the man in Ukraine whose parents would not accept their own son's evident feelings of fear, anxiety and loss. In the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the attitude of indifference must be present in millions, including the parents and relatives of those actually under attack. At the same time, that kind of indifference appears in people all over the world who manage to deny the evident tragedies and rampant injustice that characterize all of the human suffering in these troubled times.   Horney states that the first reaction to parental indifference tends to be frustration and anger. Being frustrated by the sense of abandonment causes a child to protest the injustice by crying out. If the parents respond to this angry cry, the child has found a coping strategy that is likely to become their habitual response to life's trials and troubles.   When a child's “aggressive reaction” does not bring the help they need, they are thrown back into basic anxiety and fears of abandonment. In order to survive, the child must then suppress the anger and somehow win the over the parents. If this strategy works, “compliance” becomes the preferred means of coping for that person. If neither the aggressive strategy nor the compliance strategy works, children cope with basic anxiety by means of withdrawal. In coping with anxiety by withdrawal, the child moves away from the parents, retreats inwardly and tries to become self-sufficient.   The child that adopts the strategy of anger and aggression concludes that “if I have power no one can hurt me.” The child using the strategy of compliance or connecting carries the sense that “if I can make you love me, you will not hurt me.” The child who must cope with a strategy of withdrawal follows the idea that "if I withdraw, nothing can hurt me."   The three ways of coping with basic anxiety can also be seen as three distinct conceptions of a child's inner self. The first being, I am as big as or bigger than the world. The second being, I must adjust to the world. And the third being, I must appear smaller in the world.   These psychological insights ring true, partly because they parallel defensive strategies found throughout the animal realm in patterns of fight, submission or flight in the face of danger. Being conscious of these deeply ingrained attitudes becomes more important as the world around becomes more troubled and both collective and personal anxieties increase.   Part of what intrigued me with the Ukrainian son trying to communicate with his parents in Russia, was that he seemed to go through all three strategies. At first, he was angry and frustrated and outraged that his parents were indifferent to his suffering and the suffering of all the other people in Ukraine. After that, he went through a sense of withdrawal before realizing that over time a way of compassion would be needed to reestablish some kind of basic connection with parents and other relatives.     As someone who learned the aggressive coping strategy early on, I do not instinctively go to a withdrawal strategy to get some respite or relief from tragic events. But, I do remember that in the midst of intense protests that used aggressive strategies against war, the compelling cry of "make love, not war" would arise as if on cue from the collective psyche. There had to be a limit to strategies that were solely against war. There needs to be a conscious strategy to stay connected to love and mutual care, even in the midst of war.   It seems highly unlikely that Putin or Trump or any of the other overly forceful characters on the world stage, who continually double-down on raw aggression will adopt one of the other modes. However, the rest of us who must suffer through and struggle with the great crises and sorrowful tragedies of these dark times will need to learn ways to keep finding love and building interconnectedness, even while we stand up against the war on humanity, freedom, and justice.   We need to learn new ways to retreat and find refuge for our own souls, just as we pray for those being forced to tread in the darkness of this troubled world. At this critical point in the collective life of humanity, when we are all subject to a cascade of worldwide, anxiety-inducing issues like the climate crisis, the Covid crisis and the crisis of wars against our basic humanity, we each need all three strategies to survive, to heal and to help transform the world.   Thank you for listening to and supporting Living Myth.  You can further support the podcast by becoming a member of Living Myth Premium. Along with a discount on all events, courses and book and audio titles, members receive access to the full archives of nearly 400 episodes and bonus episodes each month.   Learn more and join this community of listeners at patreon.com/livingmyth.   As always, we appreciate you leaving a review on wherever you listen to this podcast and sharing it with your friends. On behalf of Michael Meade and the whole Mosaic staff, we wish you well and thank you for your support of our work.

Elisabeth Kübler-Ross, Sabina Spielrein či Karen Horney? Nič Vám to nehovorí? Ani mne tieto mená nič nehovorili, ale po vypočutí tohto dielu to napravíme. Tip na knihu: On Death and Dying, Swiss-American psychiatrist Elisabeth Kübler-Ross

"In der zweiten Hälfte des letzten Jahrhunderts wollten die Psychotherapeuten nicht nur Psychotherapie machen, sondern Menschen dabei unterstützen Erleuchtung zu finden oder zur Selbstrealisation zu finden."

W najnowszej odsłonie „Skądinąd” opowiadam o „Kwartecie Aleksandryjskim” Lawrence'a Durrella, jednym z najważniejszych literackich dzieł XX-wiecznej literatury, o którym Peter Pomerantsev napisał, że powinno zaliczać się do ścisłego kanonu najwybitniejszych literackich dokonań wszechczasów. Koncentruję się w szczególności na wątku, o którym sam autor twierdził, że jest dla tej powieści centralny – na wątku miłości. Czym jest miłość zdaniem pisarza, o którym powiada się, że doskonale przewidział i opisał współczesność? Czego o miłości można dowiedzieć się studiując starożytnych gnostyków, Platona oraz prace Zygmunta Freuda, Karen Horney, C.G. Junga i Jamesa Hillmana? O tym i o wielu innych sprawach opowiadam w dzisiejszym odcinku. Owocnego słuchania!

Other people have what we want, but may not give it to us. In this way, other people are both an opportunity to be seized and a problem to be solved. So what is the most effective way of dealing with them? Karen Horney's "Three Trends" model provides us with an excellent lens through which to view potential paths forward. According to her theory, we can either move toward others, move against others, or move away from others. In this episode, I'll briefly discuss each of these interpersonal strategies.

Karen Horney was a German psychoanalyst. She was famous for her study of neurosis and her deviation from Friday in psychology. She was also in disagreement with Sigmund Freud regarding his attitudes toward women.

Timm Urschinger from LiveSciences and Teal Network and talk about control and how it manifests in our lives and leadership. We start by following Timm in his life's journey and along the way, discuss the manner in which our inner world (our needs, motivations, and fear) and outer world (other people, institutions, organizations, and systems) reinforce our need for control. Timm's experiences of working in a traditional corporate setting as well as leading an organization that prides itself in being “radical self-organized” provide a unique view into how leadership must evolve in sync with the world around us. I thoroughly enjoyed Timm's astute observations, his no-bullshit-let's-get-real way of speaking, and friendly banter - I hope you do too. Should you want to get in touch with Timm, feel free to connect with him on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/timm-urschinger-43269825Resources: All about Teal and the Teal Network: https://www.tealaroundtheworld.com/ https://www.reinventingorganizations.com/ https://reinventingorganizationswiki.com/ Further reading on authors, concepts, and research mentioned during the conversation:Karen Horney's work: https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/beautiful-minds/finding-inner-harmony-the-underappreciated-legacy-of-karen-horney/Leadership Circle Profile (LCP) https://leadershipcircle.com/en/reactive-leadership/ Revenge bedtime procrastination: https://www.bbc.com/worklife/article/20201123-the-psychology-behind-revenge-bedtime-procrastinationBBC article which outlines origins of the term, mentioned by Neha during the conversationPeter Koenig' “sourcework”: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/peter-koenig-on-source-money-and-consciousness/id1234632893?i=1000473862257 ; https://peterkoenig.typepad.com/eng/the-role-of-source/Otti Vogt's talk at TATW 2021 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YSX-0bTS-48&t=2008sAs always please send your feedback to droppingyourarmour@atrain.com Enjoy this episode!Neha

Foi a mulher que enfrentou Freud, dando uma leitura feminina e feminista à pscinálise.

This is the audio version of a blog post I wrote in May 2021.Everyone eventually reaches a point in life where the need to question assumptions arises; this may manifest in different ways at different points in life.  Whenever I pass the apartment nearby my girlfriend's house where the teenager loudly plays the electric guitar, I like to joke, “You don't understand me, mom!”  My girlfriend says the teenager and the mother actually seem to get along quite well.A lot of people might look around in their twenties and say, “Why are all these people doing this?” Or, they might pose this question's twin sibling, “Why am I not?”  Cultures, beliefs, assumptions evolve over decades, centuries, millennia.  The end result for beings who can think and feel is, ultimately, the perpetuation of the human race, the reward of evolution.  So, if you feel like something is “missing” or if you aren't happy, maybe it's time to take a step back and evaluate, because evolution doesn't necessarily reward us with happiness.Karen Horney was a psychoanalyst.  I, decidedly, am not, nor am I a psychologist or a therapist; I'm just a person trying to figure things out.  I excitedly read Karen Horney's 1950 book Neurosis and Human Growth after finding it as a footnote in another book by a social psychologist named Carol Tavris (I would recommend both her books Anger: The Misunderstood Emotion and Mistakes Were Made (But Not By Me)).  I really liked Neurosis and Human Growth, though I am told by Dr. Tavris, whom I emailed about it, that psychoanalysis has fallen out of vogue and is quite dated.  But, I still find a number of things Ms. Horney has to say to be extremely compelling.She talks about our expectations of life, of others, and of ourselves, dubbing this, “The Tyranny of the Should.”  This is how things “should” be, as we esteem them, as individuals, societies, and cultures; I “should” be doing this, you “should” be doing that, you “should” be treating me a certain way.  She illustrates what she calls a “neurotic claim” (Dr. Tavris also informed me psychology students today would no longer use the word “neurosis”) with an example about a train not being available when she wants to take it, and the resulting frustration that can result.  The train “should” be available at 2:30PM, when I want to take it; how stupid that it is not available then!  Certainly some injustices in our day-to-day life are more grave than others, but when you learn to see how you think about little things such as the dawdling pedestrian crossing the road or the driver who is having a hard time parallel parking, you can start to calm down a bit and go through life giving other parties a bit more benefit of the doubt.People often assume they are omniscient, as any connoisseur of Fox News or CNN might notice.  We think we have all available facts, that if you just do X, Y, and Z, life will fall into place, and a magical happiness and utopia will result.  And in a lot of ways, if you do the things you “should” do, you might be setting yourself up for success.  But, evolution didn't reward human happiness; it rewarded the conditions that led to seven billion humans on Earth, a number that has increased over 10-fold in the last 500 years.  If you've ever been to the natural history museum, humans are really old;like hundreds of thousands of years old.  So, you don't have to be a math whiz to gather that modernity and civilization are, relatively speaking, kind of a new thing.In light of this, if you are feeling unsatisfied, unfulfilled, unhappy, maybe that, actually, makes quite a bit of sense.  Modernity isn't quite as soul-crushing as history was, so we have a lot more time to think, take it easy, and ponder what exactly is going on.  If you are feeling “something is missing,” maybe a personal re-evaluation of your philosophy of life, your “shoulds,” so to speak, is in order.  My friends are all doctors, lawyers, engineers, are having children, have expensive real estate, and here I am holding a uniform from Hot Dog on a Stick and I live with my parents.  To a certain extent, a lot of “should” can put humans in a place where they can achieve happiness; it is easier to be happy when you have a little extra money in the bank.  But if you become addicted to a certain kind of lifestyle, that potential for lasting and intrinsic happiness can morph into a form of slavery, and then you're stuck making boat payments.To be sure, many people genuinely like having a boat, others maybe would be just as happy without one.  I am sure there are just as many satisfied and happy parents as there are parents who wished (or think they wished) they had never had children; and surely their answers will differ ten and twenty and forty years from now.  Different things have different meanings for different people; what do you want your life to mean for you?Jonathan Haidt and Carl Rogers both point out how inescapably social creatures humans are; if we did not care what others thought, we would be sociopaths.  But, as you get older, you can start to question some of the assumptions that are core to our historical human function.  Yes, it is impolite and rude to fart loudly on the subway, and we really ought not to shoot other people in the head for cutting us off in traffic; I think most people, on any given day, would feel these to be simple truths.  But humans are no longer on the savanna with prehistoric creatures, and a lot of the impulses and feelings we evolved with have overstayed their practical welcome.  You might start to question, as you get older, the up-keeping of appearances, and start to do the things that you want to do.  Social isolation can be lonely, but it is fair to assume we will still have friends and be allowed at the grocery store if we pull up in a Nissan Versa instead of a BMW.  Carl Rogers said, “When an activity feels as though it is valuable or worth doing, it is worth doing... I have never regretted moving in directions which ‘felt right,' even though I have often felt lonely or foolish at the time.”Learning to trust what you want from life doesn't have to mean a descent into booze-fueled nihilism coupled with a fast car and lots of drugs.  A lot of the post-WWII pop-psychologists like to talk about listening to your inner dictates, being your true self, self-realization, so on and so forth.  What they're really saying is that you need to do some things with your life that you genuinely want to do.  Rob Kurzban is a psychologist who writes about the “modular mind,” and how we evolved with different brain “modules” that achieve certain evolutionary goals; there is no “self” in there, in our brains, running the show.  This is another way of saying that all of the potential things which could be considered humanly good do not necessarily add up to all being compatible.  There is no final life solution.  Life has paradoxes.  There is nuance.  And, there are tradeoffs.What do you want from life?  What do you want from the World?  These are big questions.  Humans are sexually reproductive creatures.  If you want the pretty girl, a BMW might help.  Others will tell you that if you are relying on the fancy car to get the girl, you're getting the “wrong” kind of girl.  Do you want to start a family?  If you aren't sure, maybe you should put the idea on ice until you've better sorted out your personal life philosophy.We have some modern society-wide assumptions that go like this; you should go to college, you should have nice stuff, you should have a family, and you should get a good job.  And if you want things from the world, and from other people, a lot of these things will be mutually complementary.I did all of the things.  I was married at 23, I had a mortgage not much later, and a graduate degree in marketing.  And all I wanted to do was to sock away enough money so that we could pay off the mortgage so that I could “stop working.”  I felt this deep hatred for my work, which for me was a career in internet marketing that eventually became somewhat lucrative.  Eventually, couples therapy failed, my marriage went kaput, and I entered a fumbling figuring-myself-out in my late twenties; things people like my own parents had to figure out while being married to one another and having two young children.  And it took about ten years of fumbling and doing the same thing until I finally had saved enough money to say I could quit my job, if not forever, at least for a good long while.  I had had enough and wanted to embark on “something else.”My something else wound up entailing a lot of reading.  I started with “Winners Take All” by Anand Giridharadas.  I read a lot of non-fiction books, books about politics, something which I had an undergraduate degree in and had always been interested in.  Then I found my way from political books to pop-psychology books, since politics involves people, as well as philosophy.  I eventually wound my way to literature, having previously deemed the genre of fiction as mind-smut, and non-fiction as the way one learns things.  And in the course of all this reading, I accidentally found my own, better, personal philosophy of life, and realized some life lessons of my own.Dostoevsky, a Russian literature author, pointed out that existence is in fact slavery, and while this sounds like a bleak assessment on the surface, it is objectively true, in a sense.  We have to eat, thus, we need to get food; it so happens that now food comes from the store and not from the savanna.  I think a lot of the modern discontent which exists is a rejection of this fact, a desire to spit in its face, the dislike of reality.  Philosopher Karl Popper wrote of, “a deepfelt dissatisfaction with a world which does not, and cannot, live up to our moral ideas and to our dreams of perfection... a reaction against the strain of our civilization and its demand for personal responsibility.”  The “Closed Society” of history is gone; our roles are not predestined, we must find them for ourselves.  Humans have capacities and need to use them.  We want to work, even if it's not what we think of as “work,” as George Orwell pointed out.  A lot of political philosophy revolves about how we will re-make the World to somehow better link what we want to do with our lives versus what we must do economically in the World that has evolved.  This usually involves the bloody death of those deemed to be evil.  Suffice it to say, a paradox of “work” exists.There might be some fortunate people who find productive work which is both economically and personally rewarding.  I imagine things like physical therapist or medical doctor to be amongst these professions.  I cannot say what it is like since my profession is on the more soul-sucking/evil end of things.  But, I have come to embrace that which provides me with a roof over my head, food in the fridge, and have learned to better appreciate my fortune. Not all things which are economically productive in life are going to be rewarding, and vice versa; this is an irresolvable conflict in a society which has any form of freedom.  Ultimately, the question of whether you get to lead a happy life or not, resides with you.  People adopt philosophies of life, and if your current life philosophy is coming up short; you need to figure out a new one.  Australian “spirit master” Barry Long said, “The truth is you are responsible for your life.  If you're not responsible, it's not your life; and that's absurd.  Similarly, if you blame something else for what happens to you, you're giving up responsibility by giving it to others.  To be responsible is to be responsible for everything that happens to you, unfolding as your life.  Indeed, there are continual difficulties you have to face.  They may seem to have been caused by other agencies.  But you have to do your best to sort them out.  That's life.”I never wanted to have a family because I saw it as an elongation of my slavery, manufacturing something which needed to be supported via doing those things I already hated doing so much.  Perhaps it is a decision that I will regret in older age, though I think I have mostly moved passed living with regrets.  I quit my job to do what “I wanted to do,” and that was to think about “fixing” politics, and to try to help people, somehow.  I came to realize one of the best ways I could do something to “help people” was to lend financial assistance to young children in my own extended family who had the misfortune of being born with no fathers in the picture and are being raised by their grandmother; this very same something that I had previously found to be a very frustrating financial burden.  The idea that somehow people can be okay with bringing children into the world and then not loving or taking care of them has always been deeply troubling to me; I always viewed having children as an enormous responsibility.  So, I can do what I can to try to right this wrong, however inadequate.Leo Tolstoy's character Pierre, near the end of War and Peace, gave good color to the need for perspective in life.  As a political prisoner of the invaders from Napoleonic France in his own native Russia, he discovers the Aurelian truth that all is perspective.  Pierre suffers from blisters on his feet from marching as a prisoner of war.  Tolstoy writes, “While imprisoned in the shed Pierre had learned not with his intellect but with his whole being, by life itself, that man is created for happiness, that happiness is within him, in the satisfaction of simple human needs, and that all unhappiness arises not from privation but from superfluity. And now during these last three weeks of the march he had learned still another new, consolatory truth — that nothing in this world is terrible. He had learned that as there is no condition in which man can be happy and entirely free, so there is no condition in which he need be unhappy and lack freedom. He learned that suffering and freedom have their limits and that those limits are very near together; that the person in a bed of roses with one crumpled petal suffered as keenly as he now... and that when he had put on tight dancing shoes he had suffered just as he did now when he walked with bare feet that were covered with sores... He discovered that when he had married his wife — of his own free will as it had seemed to him — he had been no more free than now when they locked him up at night in a stable. Of all that he himself subsequently termed his sufferings, but which at the time he scarcely felt, the worst was the state of his bare, raw, and scab-covered feet. (The horseflesh was appetizing and nourishing, the saltpeter flavor of the gunpowder they used instead of salt was even pleasant; there was no great cold, it was always warm walking in the daytime, and at night there were the campfires; the lice that devoured him warmed his body.) The one thing that was at first hard to bear was his feet.”Viktor Frankl, a Holocaust survivor and author of Man's Search For Meaning, implores his reader to ask, what does life demand of you.  Not to ask, what is the meaning of life.  Because, the meaning of life cannot be known to humans.  So, we must make our own meaning.  Our greatest freedom is the choice of how to respond to life.  The determinists, those who think all is pre-ordained and nothing can be changed, would say we do not even have this freedom.  But if we do not have this freedom, why should we live?In my quest to do “something else” with my life, I strangely find myself back in a similar place, doing internet marketing part-time so that I can fulfill financial obligations to help my family.  But I do not think of it as I thought of it before.  I can think of no better use of my time to contribute, financially and spiritually, to two young children in my own family with no fathers.  I still do not like my line of work, not genuinely, but it provides me with financial freedom and time to write things such as this.People make decisions.  A lot of people choose prisons of their own making, maybe inadvertently, maybe on purpose.  The determinist says people don't make decisions, “[W]ith them one is always a ‘victim of the environment'--and nothing else!” Are our own abilities to evaluate our lives a product of our social environment?  It surely plays a role, but we must play the cards we are dealt.  If you can learn to trust yourself, your “inner dictates,” a sea of anxiety and self-mistrust can begin to wash away, in time, and you can begin to live your life more in accordance with what you think you should do.  I believe this because I feel it myself; I recognize my good psychological fortune in having been raised by two loving parents in a small rural Ivy League town.  I like to have time to ride my bicycle and read books; riding my bike brings me great joy, and provides me with a source of happiness.  Helping my family brings me a source of meaning, and one day I'd like to try to help others figure out how to better succeed at life in ways that I have.  I do not accept that the only way to contribute to humanity is to have children, that there is something wrong with me because I am in my late 30s, have no car, and live with a cat.  I am not here on Earth to somehow preserve someone else's standards for living. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit underconsumed.substack.com

Todos hablan de amor propio, pero cuando lo que sentimos es odio, es mucho más importante identificarlo para trabajarlo. La psicoanalista Karen Horney encontró 6 formas de expresarnos desprecio a nosotros/as mismos/as ¡Acompáñame a descubrirlas!Si quieres saber más del amor y muchos otros temas, únete a nuestra comunidad de Patreon.https://www.patreon.com/beautyvalueY recuerda seguirnos en nuestras redes sociales, donde encontrarás mucha información de tu interés:Página web:https://beautyvalue.esInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/eva_herbert/https://www.instagram.com/beauty_value/Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/Eva-Herbert-236635853024839/https://www.facebook.com/beautyvaluevenezuela/LinkedIn:https://ve.linkedin.com/in/eva-herbert-hernández-23a624b2Y si deseas agendar tu primera consulta psicológica online, ingresa a:https://beautyvalue.es/atencion-psicologica/

This week we speak with Dr Thomas Curran, Assistant Professor in the Department of Psychological and Behavioural Science at the London School of Economics. His research into the personality characteristics of perfectionism and cultural influences upon it have highlighted the growing impact of perfectionism on young people's mental health, as well as what society needs to do to address it.    Dr Curran's research and articles https://www.lse.ac.uk/PBS/People/Dr-Tom-Curran TED Talk on our obsession with Perfectionism https://www.ted.com/talks/thomas_curran_our_dangerous_obsession_with_perfectionism_is_getting_worse?language=en    Book recommendations  Brené Brown, The Gifts of Imperfection  TED talk on the Power of Vulnerability by Brené Brown https://www.ted.com/talks/brene_brown_the_power_of_vulnerability?language=en  Karen Horney, Neurosis and Human Growth More about Karen Horney and her work https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karen_Horney  Susan Cain, Quiet TED talk, the Power of Introverts, Susan Cain https://www.ted.com/talks/susan_cain_the_power_of_introverts?language=en Contact us @hearitpodcast or info@threadandfable.com 

معرفی کتابکتاب صوتی روانشناسی زنان نوشته‌ی کارن هورنای، دربردارنده‌ی راهکارها و شیوه‌های مفیدی است که موجب توسعه‌ی خودشناسی در زنان، بهبود روابط با جنس مخالف و پیشرفت زندگی زناشویی می‌شود. مطالعه‌ی این کتاب برای تمامی زنان و مردان سودمند خواهد بود.درباره‌ی کتاب :کارن هورنای در کتاب صوتی روانشناسی زنان (Feminine psychology‬)، رفتارهای زنان را مورد نقد و بررسی قرار می‌دهد و از سوی دیگر به مردان در جهت شناخت زنان کمک می‌کند. این اثر، حاصل مجموعه‌ای از مقالات نویسنده درباره‌ی زنان است و یکی از کتاب‌های عمیق علمی و روانشناسی به شمار می‌رود که ثمره‌ی بررسی روحیات و رفتار صدها زنی است که برای دریافت مشاوره و مداوا به مطب نویسنده مراجعه نموده‌اند.موضوعات بسیاری در این کتاب صوتی وجود دارد و به شیوه‌ای عالمانه و منصفانه مورد نقد و بررسی قرار گرفته است که در میان آن‌ها می‌توان به مسئله‌ی تک‌همسری، زنانگی سرکوب شده، بی‌اعتمادی و گمانه‌زنی‌های میان زن و شوهر، تنش پیش از قاعدگی، تضادهای مادری، تغییرات شخصیت در دختران نوبالغ، نیاز روان رنجورانه به عشق، مشکلات و موانع بر سر راه ازدواج و... اشاره نمود. هم‌چنین کتاب روانشناسی زنان به این سوال که تفاوت رفتار زن و مرد و نگرش جامعه بشری نسبت به زن از کجا سرچشمه می‌گیرد نیز جواب می‌دهد.کارن هورنای (Karen Horney) در این کتاب مخالفت خود را درباره‌ی این عقیده و باور متداول در بین مردم جهان که مردها در مقایسه با زن‌ها به چندهمسری گرایش بیشتری دارند؛ اعلام کرده است. اگر تاکنون به زن بودن خود می‌بالیدید، با شنیدن این کتاب صوتی احساس رضایت‌تان چندین برابر می‌شود، اما اگر این‌طور نیست، پس از آشنایی با کتاب صوتی روانشناسی زنان نسبت به توانایی‌ها و مزایای زن بودن خود آگاهی بیشتری پیدا می‌کنید و احساس بهتر و لذت‌بخش‌تری نسبت به زن بودن‌ خود خواهید داشت.شنیدن کتاب به چه کسانی پیشنهاد می‌شود:این کتاب را به منظور شناخت جنس مخالف و گرفتن بهترین تصمیم در زمان برخورد با جنس مخالف به نگارش درآورده است؛ بنابراین شنیدن این کتاب صوتی به تمام زنان و مردانی که در پی بهبود روابط خود هستند، پیشنهاد می‌شود.لطفا کتاب کست را به دیگران معرفی کنید.اینستاگرام کتاب کست:Instagram.com/KetabCastPodcastتلگرام کتاب کست:T.me/KetabCastPodcast

Babbling about my Facebook being hacked.  Also, asked what was the biggest laugh I ever had, the one armed girl, update on getting the 2nd vaccination shot, the best Cream Puffs with Chris Distefano and much more! Skylight Frame PERFECT for Mother's Day - $10 off your purchase of a Skylight Frame just go to https://www.skylightframe.com  and enter code OPIE  The clip with Chris Distefano was form episode 9 - Cream Puff Boys.  Here's the whole episode https://omny.fm/shows/opie-radio/or-053018-ep-9 The clip with Carl Ruiz was from episode 54 - Heartbreaker.  Here's the whole episode https://omny.fm/shows/opie-radio/ep-54-heartbreaker an AMAZING EPISODE! Join us everyday for my livestream on my YouTube https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXGecfdP4LZs8BMSytOJJqA and my Facebook. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

La tiranía de los “deberías” es un concepto interesantísimo que estudió una psicóloga muy famosa que se llama Karen Horney. Karen Horney explicaba que, muchas veces, el ser humano caemos en una competición con nosotros mismos o con otra persona. ¿Qué es la tiranía de los “deberías”? Es caer en esos “debería haber sido”, “debería haber logrado”, “debería haber dicho” o “debería no haber hecho”, “no haber dicho”… Es… Si lo identificamos con uno mismo. Entonces, este es mi “yo” ideal. Esto es lo que yo debería ser. Y este es mi “yo” real, y estoy compitiendo. https://www.facebook.com/radioi2​​​​​​​ https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC3IeeQ1xC61xyoaDNzwgsJw https://www.instagram.com/radioi2/ --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/radioi2oficial/message

  For episode 39, we have an account of my wonderful friend Ali and I galivanting around the space-time continuum, through a delightfully twisty and turny wormhole of conversation. Topics discussed include (but are not limited to): hip-hop, nonviolent communication, metal, body image, compassionate self talk, maidens, crones,  non-monogamy, Karen Horney and social penis envy, penis wielders, vulva havers, gratitude, empathy, cuddling, listening, panromanticism…   Photo courtesy of Linda Gray

Sigmund Freud besuchte 1909 die Vereinigten Staaten auf Einladung von G. Stanley Hall, dem ersten Präsidenten der American Psychological Society und Schüler von Wilhelm Wundt. Freud hielt eine Reihe von Vorträgen auf Deutsch in den USA und wurde dafür mit einer Ehrendoktorwürde und einem Stipendium von 750 Dollar belohnt. Anders als in Europa war Freud in den USA schon so bekannt, dass seine Bücher zum festen Lehrstoff der Psychologiestudierenden an der Clark University in Massachusetts gehörten. Die Rezeption der Ideen Freuds entwickelte sich ab 1909 in eigenen Bahnen, unabhängig vom Begründer der Psychoanalyse. Dies hing mit zwei Faktoren zusammen: Der oft eigensinnigen Übersetzung von Freuds Werken ins Englische durch Abraham A. Brill und der Vorgeschichte der Psychologie in den USA, die sehr stark durch Pragmatismus (William James) und Theologie, vor allem durch die Christian Science, beeinflusst war. Hinzu kam die feministische Kritik an Freuds Ideen, in denUSA vor allem durch Karen Horney. Der Beitrag soll die Rezeptionsgeschichte der Psychoanalyse und ihrer Popularisierung in den USA aufzeigen unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Adaption von Freuds Ideen in den Hollywood-Tonfilmen nach 1950. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Today's topic is heavy, but incredibly important. We discuss our own battles with anxiety, depression, PTSD, and sexual abuse. We also talk about two women who played a pivotal role in the development of techniques/practices in the mental health field. Mira discusses the life of Karen Horney. Elysia talks about Dr. Claire Weekes. Happy International Women's Day!

This episode will tell you more about various psychodynamic theories that will help you understand personality. Get to know Sigmund Freud, Alfred Adler, Carl Jung, Karen Horney – and of course, yourself! (Audio Credit: [1] ...Ready for it? by Taylor Swift; [2] Bata, Dahan-dahan! by IV of Spades; and [3] Still Don't Know My Name by Labyrinth)

In Part I, we discussed how you have been raised to be codependent. In Part II, we will look at how you have been reinforced to put the needs of others above your own. How have you been set up to be codependent through the encouragement, modeling, and reinforcement from others. Be sure to listen to Part I and Part III to hear about ways you have been raised and rewarded to be codependent! Thanks for listening! Be sure to check out: www.codependummy.com @codependummy on IG Sign up for my free course Codependummy 101 at www.codependummy.com  In This Podcast episode: Marissa walks through ways you were encouraged, reinforced, and cheered on to please others--as it relates to her body. You'll get details and examples to help you build awareness of how you have been reinforced to be codependent in your own life from your parents, authority figures, and even your friends!  You're invited to reflect and think critically about the messages you received from others about what it meant when you were self-sacrificing and prioritized others above yourself. We start to normalize rather than pathologize your codependency--since you were set up to be this way. You are not crazy! Helpful links: www.codependummy.com Social Pressures Often Reinforce Codependency Interactions in Relationships: Codependency vs. Positive Reinforcement The Common Thread Between Food Addiction and Codependency How Food Addiction & Codependency Go Hand in Hand Want to work with me? Go to www.therapywithmarissa.com  What is codependency and how does it manifest other ways?  In this episode, we look at Karen Horney's definition of codependency as: “a magical belief that they will find an answer to life through others.” Marissa talks about how she was often reinforced to please others through her body. She discusses how she became “body conscious,” meaning hyper-concious and self-conscious of her body in order to get others approval, attention, and affection.  How has your body, weight, and relationship with food been dependent on the like, love, and approval from others? Marissa provides real-life examples of ways she was reinforced to be codependent as it relates to her weight--since she wanted others to like her so she figured she needed to stay small. She also discusses ways she has seen it in other young women who were reinforced to please others by maintaining a small body. Do you remember times when adults provided you messages about how they liked you for your beauty? Your brains? Your body? Your thoughtfulness? Your consideration? Ask yourself: What's a time when you really learned that you could please others by looking pretty? Being smart? Maintaining a small frame? Getting everything done on time? Cleaning the house? How did you learn to get the love you were pining for by meeting the expectations of others? Also, we look at the rules that codependents follow where they hold themselves to a higher, almost impossible standard out of feelings of unworthiness.  How has your codependency shown up in different ways? How does it manifest? What do you sense is underneath your symptoms and negative coping skills?  Be sure to leave a rating and review! 

Dr. Michael Karson and I talk about psychopathology and personality disorders.  We discuss the differences between mental illnesses that are more biological in nature and those that are more psychological in nature.  For the former, Dr. Karson uses the phrase psychiatric disorder and for the latter, psychopathology.  We discuss the nature of psychopathology using different metaphors and analogies.  Specifically, we dive into personality disorders: what they are, their origins, and treatment.  We also mention the work of Karen Horney, a psychoanalyst, and her notions of the ideal self vs. the real self.  Michael Karson, Ph.D., J.D., is a professor at the University of Denver's Graduate School of Professional Psychology, but he practiced clinical and forensic psychology for 25 years before entering academia. He is the sole or first author of six books, including What Every Therapist Needs to Know, Patterns of Child Abuse: How Dysfunctional Transactions are Replicated in Individuals, Families, and the Child Welfare System; Deadly Therapy: Lessons in Liveliness from Theater and Performance Theory; and Using Early Memories in Psychotherapy: Roadmaps to Presenting Problems and Treatment Impasses.The Sanity Sessions: Exploring Mental Illness And Maladaptations is a biweekly podcast featuring interviews with leading experts in the field of psychology and mental health.   Clint Sabom is Creative Director of Contemplative Light. He lived in Budapest, Hungary in 2003 as a Gilman Scholar. He speaks English, Spanish, and Portuguese. In 2007, he lived for six months in a silent monastery.. He holds bachelor's degrees in Religious Studies and one in Spanish literature. He has traveled extensively through Europe and South America. He has spoken and/or performed at Amnesty International, Health Conferences, High Schools, and art galleries across the US. He has studied and done in his own work in Advaita Vedanta, Buddhism, Shamanism, NLP, and hypnosis.   Clint offers a powerful audio mini-course on emotional release, with powerful techniques you can use the rest of your life.  Learn more here: https://contemplativelight.teachable.com/p/emotional-release

Ask David featuring four terrific Should questions, and more questions about “asinine, stupid, narcissistic, self-serving humans! “ Oliver asks: Can a thought be thought as moral or immoral? Vincent asks: I have suffered from depression for about 3 years and say to myself, "I should have gotten better sooner." Isn't this "should" appropriate? Charles says: Your concept of “no self” shot my anxiety way up and made me feel hopeless. . . . It makes me feel worse than before! Michelle asks: How is your requirement that new patients must agree to not make any suicide attempts for the rest of their lives any different to a “suicide contract” which you mention are not effective? Brian asks: I’ve done a few things that made me feel intensely guilty. . . . The knowledge that I didn’t do what I should have done led to a lot of guilt and shame, and eventually depression. Just wondering your thoughts on this Carrel asks: I'm a Democrat in Texas. How can we use disarming to heal the political rifts in our country? Natasha asks: How do I stop the dark thoughts of wishing harm to come to stupid humans who do asinine, narcissistic, self serving, irresponsible things—like driving massive, loud pickup trucks around the neighborhood, honking incessantly as they wave their 20 ft political flags; or bringing the family for a paddle boat ride in the local pond, taking delight in teaching their human offspring to paddle the boat as quickly as they can to chase after the beautiful, innocent geese and ducks trying earnestly and fearfully to swim to safety. and more.   Dear Dr. Burns, Can a thought be thought as moral or immoral? In many podcasts and articles, you use "Thou Shalt Not Kill" to demonstrate morally should statement, which is one of the 3 valid should statements in English. I'm still somewhat confused about this concept. To tell you where I get stuck, I come up with three thought experiments. Imagine the following situations in which a should statement may come to mind: Situation 1 Lisa stole some money from a grocery store. When arrested by police, Lisa said with tears, "I shouldn't have stolen money. I feel ashamed for what I have done." In this case, it is obvious that "I shouldn't have stolen money" is a morally should statement, and also a legally should statement, because Lisa did something that violates the law and her moral principle. DAVID’S COMMENT: YES, YOU ARE CORRECT. LISA’S STATEMENT CAN BE CLASSIFIED AS A LEGAL SHOULD AND A MORAL SHOULD. Situation 2 One day, Bob went to Walmart to buy a suit. When he was passing by a shelf, a thought appeared in her mind. "What would happen if I steal this suit? I really want it, but I have very little money." When he came back home, he talked to himself," I shouldn't have felt the urges to steal things. And I shouldn’t have thought about stealing the suit." DAVID’S COMMENT: THESE WOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED VALID SHOULD STATEMENTS BY MOST PEOPLE, SINCE WE HAVE FREEDOM OF THOUGHT. HUMAN BEINGS HAVE ALL KINDS OF FANTASIES AND URGES ALL THE TIME—AT LEAST I KNOW THAT I DO! AN URGE ONLY BECOMES IMMORAL OR ILLEGAL WHEN YOU ACT ON IT. HOWEVER, ALTHOUGH I DO NOT THINK THESE ARE VALID SHOULDS, BUT I TRY NOT TO IMPOSE MY VALUES ON OTHERS FOR THE MOST PART. I AM A SHRINK, SO I WORK WITH PEOPLE WHO ARE ASKING FOR HELP. FOR EXAMPLE, PEOPLE WITH OCD OFTEN PUNISH THEMSELVES JUST FOR HAVING “FORBIDDEN” THOUGHTS, FEELINGS, OR URGES. THE FIGHT TO CONTROL THEM IS THE ACTUAL CAUSE OF THE OCD. THE SHOULDS TYPICALLY MAKE THE PROBLEM WORSE, NOT BETTER. SELF-ACCEPTANCE CAN BE ONE OF MANY HELPFUL TREATMENT STRATEGIES. RELIGION CAN SOMETIMES BE A SOURCE OF OPPRESSIVE SHOULDS, ESPECIALLLY THE MORE FUNDAMENTALIST TYPES OF RELIGION. RIGIDITY MAY BE A PARTIALLY INHERITED TRAIT. FOR EXAMPLE, MANY RELIGIONS AROUND THE WORLD PROMOTE THE IDEA THAT HOMOSEXUALITY IS “WRONG” AND THAT PEOPLE “SHOULDN’T” HAVE URGES AND ATTRACTIONS TOWARD PEOPLE OF THE SAME GENDER. THIS IS AN AREA WHERE “SHOULD STATEMENTS” BECOME HIGHLY CONTROVERSIAL, AND ARE OFTEN A SOURCE OF HORRIFIC HATRED AND VIOLENCE, SOMETIMES IN THE NAME OF SOME “HIGHER POWER.” Situation 3 Lucy was buying fruits in a grocery store when she found that a man was taking an apple off the shelf and hiding it in his clothe! Obviously, the man was stealing an apple. Lucy was very angry and said, "the man shouldn't steal things from the store. It's not right!" In this case, Lucy didn't steal apples, the man did. But Lucy made a moral judgement about the man's behavior, not Lucy's behavior. Then is this should statement valid for Lucy? DAVID’S THINKING. TO MY WAY OF THINKING, YES THESE ARE VALID LEGAL SHOULDS AND MORAL SHOULDS, SINCE OUR CIVILIZATION (AND ALL CIVILIZATIONS) HAVE DECIDED THAT STEALING IS ILLEGAL, AND IS ALSO CONSIDERED MORALLY WRONG IN MOST RELIGIONS: “THOU SHALT NOT STEAL” IS, I THINK, ONE OF THE TEN COMMANDMENTS. THE GOAL IS NOT TO CLEAN UP YOUR SPEECH SO THAT YOU NEVER USE SHOULD STATEMENTS THAT DO NOT FIT INTO ONE OF THE THREE VALID CATEGORIES OF LEGAL SHOULDS, MORAL SHOULD, AND LAWS OF THE UNIVERSE SHOULDS. AT LEAST I HAVE NO INTEREST IN THAT. MY GOAL IS TO HELP PEOPLE WHO ARE SUFFERING BECAUSE OF SHOULD STATEMENTS. sincerely Oliver   Hi David, What is it with "shoulds" related to recovery from depression? I suffer from depression for about 3 years and say to myself "I should have gotten better sooner." Isn't this "should" appropriate? Because who really wants to suffer through this agony? Greetings from Geneva. Vincent Hi Vincent, "I wish I had gotten better sooner." This is a correct statement without the "should." This simple shift in language is called the Semantic Technique, and it was developed by Dr. Albert Ellis who kind of gave birth to cognitive therapy in the 1950s, along with Dr. Karen Horney about the same time. Instead of using a should, you use “it would be preferable if” or “I wish X was true.” In addition, it isn't actually true that you "should" have gotten better sooner! The universe does not always conform to our expectations. Just because we want something, it doesn't follow that it "should" happen. I'd love to have a new Tesla sports car, at least in fantasy, but it isn't true that I "should" have one. It would be “great” if you had gotten better sooner, that’s absolutely true. “I should have gotten better sooner.” That’s totally false. In addition, although one might think that no one would "want" depression, my research and new clinical work indicate that resistance is nearly always the key to recovery. In other words, people do cling to depression, anxiety, troubled relationships, and habits and addictions, but don’t realize why they are resisting change. Once you suddenly see why you are resisting, your resistance paradoxically disappears, and recovery is then just a stone’s throw away. You can learn more about this in my new book, Feeling Great, available now on Amazon. Thanks! PS let me know if you like the new book, and if you find it helpful! All the best, David   A new comment on the post "108: Do You Have a "Self?"" is waiting for your approval Author: Charles Dr. Burns, First off I want to say thank you. Your work has been helping me through my anxiety. However, I really struggled with this podcast. The concept of no self shot my anxiety way up and made me feel hopeless. It made me feel almost as if I was not real or that there is nothing worth striving for. I love helping people. But I feel like I don’t have a purpose if I don’t have a self. It makes me feel worse than before. David’s answer. Hi Charles, The “great death” of the self is a challenging concept, and while it is incredibly liberating, lots of people—most, in fact—don’t “get it.” Some get angry. Some struggle with trying to understand what this could possibly mean. And some find the concept very threatening. That’s why I deleted the chapter from my book. In fact, a couple extremely brilliant and interested colleagues totally couldn’t grasp it, and felt frustrated by my writing on the concept. sometimes, ideas are so simple and basic that people cannot grasp them. The Buddha ran into this problem 2500 years ago. People thought he was fantastic, but almost none of his followers experienced the enlightenment he was so excited to teach them. The 20th century philosopher, Ludwig Wittgenstein, ran into the same problem. He solve all the problems of philosophy, but when he was alive, it was rumored that only seven people in the world, including one of his favorite students, Norman Malcolm, could grasp what he was saying. He went in and out of intense depression and loneliness during his life, in part because of his frustration with trying to teach the obvious. In my book, Feeling Great, I teach that there are actually four “Great Deaths” for the patient, corresponding to recovery from depression, anxiety disorders, relationship conflicts, and habits and addictions. There are also four “Great Deaths” for TEAM therapists. Those sections might be helpful for you! In addition, I focus on the fact that people can never judge your “self,” only something specific that you think or do. Depression cannot exist on the specific level, only up in the clouds of abstraction. For example, Overgeneralization is one of the ten cognitive distortions I described in my first book, Feeling Good. When you Overgeneralize, you see a negative event as a never-ending pattern of defeat, and you might also Overgeneralize from some specific flaw or defect to your “self.” You will read about an attractive and vivacious young professional woman who had the thought, “I’m unloveable,” when her boyfriend of two years broke up with her. This is classic depression thinking, and “self” thinking. She thinks she has a “self” that can be loveable or unloveable. But this is simply not true, and it’s not productive, because she’ll spend all her time ruminating and feeling worthless. An alternative is to focus on why the (overall excellent) relationship didn’t work out, and what she can do to change and learn and grow, so as to make the next relationship even better. You can pick up on the details in the chapter on Overgeneralization if you’re interested! As I point out in Feeling Great, the “death of the self” is not like a funeral, it’ like an incredible celebration of life. Death of your old concept of what you are is liberating, and leads to instant rebirth. My teachings cannot make you happy or unhappy. Your thoughts about what I’m saying create all of your feelings, positive or negative. At any rate, thank you for a most important question that most of my audience will definitely related to. As an aside, I lost my “self” years ago, and what a relief that was. Sadly, it comes back to life from time to time, and then I struggle again, until I realize what’s happening. One day, what I’m saying may make sense! In the meantime, please accept my apologies concerning the “self!” If it gives you comfort to believe you have a “self,” no problem. But the “self” is just a concept, and not a “thing” that could exist or not exist. When you lose your precious and protected “self,” you lose nothing, because there was never anything there in the first place! But while you lose nothing, you do inherit the earth, as nearly all great religious leaders—Buddha, Jesus, and others—have taught us. David   Hi Dr. Burns, I’ve just listened to your podcast episode on suicide and found it really interesting and useful but I have a few questions. Firstly, how is your requirement that the patient agree to not make any suicide attempts for the rest of their life any different to a ‘suicide contract’ which you mention are not effective? Also, you talk about doing this assessment at the intake and making non-attempts a condition of therapy. If the patient/client agrees to this, why then do you continue to monitor suicidal thoughts in each session in the BMS? Presumably because the agreement is no guarantee of cessation of thoughts. Surely if you’ve told them it’s a condition of therapy with you to not make any attempts then they’d be likely to not tell you about them even if they occurred, and don’t see how setting the initial ground rule resolves the problem. And lastly, when suicidal thoughts, urges, or fantasies do come again in the BMS how do you handle it then? Do you tell them you’ll end therapy, say “but you promised”? Looking forward to your reply. Thanks, Michelle. Hi Michelle, I have scheduled your email for an upcoming ask david episode, and will use your first name unless you prefer that i use some other name. Here is a brief reply. Most patients with borderline personality disorder will become enraged by the gentle ultimatum at the initial evaluation, and if they decide this is not the type of therapy they want, so be it. The techniques I use will not be effective with patients who continue to threaten suicide. TEAM therapy requires TEAM work. Most, nearly all, patients will "get it" and will decide to continue with the therapy. They can have suicidal thoughts and urges, and we can work on them together in therapy. However, to my way of thinking, it is important that they therapist and patient be protected, in a safe environment. If the patient starts threatening to make a suicide attempt, then they will need another form of more intensive treatment like hospitalization, day care, or intensive outpatient treatment. These are options I cannot personally provide for them. I monitor suicidal urges before and after each session with every patient with no exceptions to protect the patient and to protect myself as well. Thanks! PS the suicide contract is an agreement not to attempt suicide "while we are working together." This is very weak, as the patient can suddenly decide he or she is dropping out of therapy and making a suicide attempt. And this often happens. My contract is more demanding, and intentionally so. Patients must also agree to do psychotherapy homework, too. Some patients want to make the therapist a hostage with suicide threats, which can and so work as a form of manipulation and hostility. Then the therapist is in an almost constant state of agitation, anxiety, and frustration. If I allow a patient to make my life miserable, how can I teach that patient how to be happy? We are all ONE—we go up and down together. If I allow you to make my life miserable, then I am allowing you to make your own life miserable, too. David   Hello David, Thank you so much for everything you do. I’ve listened to all of your podcasts, and read most of your books, and am very grateful for the changes you, Rhonda, Fabrice and the rest of the team have made to my life. I’ve just listened to this episode, and there’s one thing I’m struggling with, which is the concept of the moral should. I’ve done a few things that made me intensely guilty – one in particular was not standing by and supporting a friend who needed people when he was going through a particularly hard time. He was angry and disappointed with me, and, in hindsight, rightly so. He has since forgiven me but I still struggle with it. I feel that supporting him was a moral should. The knowledge that I didn’t do what I should have done led to a lot of guilt and shame, and eventually depression. You say that a moral should is valid; so therefore, I feel that my negative thoughts on this are not misguided but valid – I did something morally wrong and deserved to feel bad for it. Just wondering your thoughts on this. Thanks again, and keep up the good work! Hi Brian, thanks! Would love to include this on an Ask David, using just your first name, or even a fake name if you prefer. A quick response might be to ask how many minutes per day would you like to dedicate to feeling guilty? And for how many days, months, or years? In your spiritual or religious beliefs, is a person supposed to feel intensely guilty forever? Most of us have done things we are ashamed of, or feel guilty about. How much guilt and shame would you recommend for me, for example? And what is the goal of the guilt and shame? And how guilty would you recommend I feel, between 0% and 100%? That's one approach. Another approach would be A = Assessment of Resistance, listing what the guilt shows about you that's positive and awesome, and then asking yourself why in the world you'd want to let go of the guilt, given all the many real positives. Then you might validly decide to “dial it down” to some more acceptable level. For example, if you now feel 90% guilty, perhaps 15% or 20% would be enough. In addition, you could also decide how many minutes of guilt you would recommend. If you now feel guilty about eight hours a day, would 10 minutes be enough? If so, you could schedule your “guilt periods” ahead of time, and then really work hard at feeling guilty during those ten minutes. Then, when you’re done with your “guilt work,” you can return to joyous and loving living! Also, instead of one ten minute daily guilt binge, you could schedule, for example, three guilt binges, each three minutes long, in the morning, at lunch time, and in the evening, like three pills the doctor prescribed! David In reply to Dr. Burns. Hi Dr Burns, Thanks so much for your quick response! I really appreciate your advice; I will dedicate a bit of time today to approaching it the way you say. And also, I’d be delighted if you included it on a podcast! You can use my first name by all means. Thanks again! Brian   Comment from Carrel I'm a Democrat in Texas. How can we use disarming to heal the political rifts in our country? How does one find agreement across that ever-widening divide? Carrel David’s reply Hi Carrel, It’s really tough, for sure! Have you listened to my podcast on this topic? There is a search function on my website. If you type in “political divide,” this podcast will pop right up: “127: How Can We Communicate with Loved Ones on the Opposite Side of the Political Divide?” Let me know what you think! David David emphasizes the value of the search function. Often you can find your questions have already been addressed. In addition, the many podcasts on the Five Secrets of Effective Communication could be invaluable (links), and the emphasis would be on using the Disarming Technique to find some truth in what the other person is proclaiming and arguing for. But first, you have a decision to make, and this is always based on ONE person you may want to interact with. First, ask yourself if you do actually want a better relationship with person X, Y, or Z. There is no rule that says we have to get along better with everyone. I think that Joe Biden is doing a pretty good job of promoting unity, and not diverseness in our country. Hopefully, the forces of love and unity will win out over the forces of hatred and war, but it’s not at all clear what direction our country is heading for. And we’re seeing now that at times the tensions are become so intense, and the hatred so strong, that violence is once again on the increase. In the next Ask David we'll have a really cool session devoted to the intense anger that many of us feel when confronted by human behavior that strikes us as narcissistic, vicious, self-serving, and aggressive. This topic should appeal to lots of people! And we have a wonderful question from a woman who's feeling pretty darn enraged! David and Rhonda  

In this podcast I give an overview of major personality theories within Psychology, at the introduction to psychology course level. Starting with Freud's structure of personality, neoFreudians like Alfred Adler, Karen Horney (pronounced Hor-neigh - I know you're disappointed), humanistic psychology with Carl Rogers, Trait theories, as well as cultural influences on our personalities. Whew!  Index:  Defining Personality   Sigmund Freud  levels of Consciousness(Freud)  Three parts of personality, Id, Ego, Superego(Freud)  ego defense mechanisms (Freud)  Alfred Adler (neoFreudian)  Carl Jung (neoFreudian)  Karen Horney (neoFreudian)  Humanistic perspective, self concept (Carl Rogers)  Trait theories   Five factor model (Trait theory)  Cultural influence on personality   Personality Assessments (tests) Thanks again for listening!  Find me via email: PsychExplained@pm.me, or  via Twitter, @JACKBTEACHING (I know, that's clever, right?). Ways to Support my podcast: Use Anchor link below, choose a monthly amount, Or a single donation using PayPal to my username, @JACKYAC  Or my PayPal profile page: https://paypal.me/jackyac?locale.x=en_US All support received goes towards keeping Dr. Chuang caffeinated, and the coffee purchased will be from local, small roasters and coffee shops - so your support will help local small businesses! --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/jackbteaching/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/jackbteaching/support

Karen Horney äußert früh Kritik an Freuds Theorien, zum Beispiel am „Penisneid“, der die Frau als defizitäres Wesen darstellt. Horney setzt eine eigene Theorie dagegen und betont die gelungene Identifikation mit der Mutter als Basis für die Entwicklung des weiblichen Selbst. Diese Vorstellung hat weitreichende Folgen: Dank Horney gibt es eine positive Beschreibung der psychischen Entwicklung von Mädchen und Frauen. 1932 verlässt sie Berlin, wo sie praktiziert hat, in Richtung USA.

No episódio de hoje, nossas hosts @astridlacerda e @julietamorais conversam com a professora e psicanalista Anna Ribeiro, sobre Karen Horney - psicanalista alemã e fundadora da psicologia feminina. Mulher que foi contra as teorias freudianas que sustentavam a natureza masoquista e dependente das mulheres. Teorias que as obrigavam a buscar o significado de suas vidas por meio de um marido, filhos e do cuidado da família.

Aspectos Gerais

Today, the Cognitive Distortion Starter Kit Continues with Should Statements Rhonda begins by reading a beautiful email from one of our listeners, and I give a brief shout out for my new book, Feeling Great, which can be pre-ordered on Amazon now (see below for the link). Thanks to your support, as of today (July 2) it is already the #1 best seller in the Amazon depression AND anxiety categories for impending new books! David and Rhonda briefly summarize the history of Should Statements, starting with the Buddha 2500 years ago, and culminating in the work of Karen Horney and Albert Ellis in the 20th century. They both emphasized that nearly all emotional suffering as well as relationship conflict results from “Shoulds.” David and Rhonda describe the four categories of Should Statements: Shoulds directed against yourself cause depression, anxiety, guilt, and shame. and even lead to suicidal urges. Should directed against others cause anger, and can even lead to violence. Shoulds directed against the world cause frustration. Hidden Shoulds. They also describe the three valid types of Should Statements: Moral Shoulds Legal Shoulds Laws of the Universe Shoulds David and Rhonda provide vignettes illustrating the tremendous emotional damage that can result from “Shoulds” and describe a number of strategies for combating them, including: Positive Reframing the Semantic Technique Socratic Questioning the Acceptance Paradox The final podcast in this series will focus on the two types of Blame: Self-Blame, which nearly always marches hand-in-hand with Self-Directed Shoulds Other-Blame, which nearly always marches hand-in-hand with Other-Directed Shoulds Rhonda and David

Episódio Análise de Polly Gray da série Peaky Blinders, a partir de Karen Horney

Are you “shoulding” all over yourself? The word “Should” happens to be one of the most insidious in the English language. In today's episode, we talk about how: Psychoanalyst Karen Horney called “The Tyranny of the Should” this tendency to create an idealized self and a rejection of the real self. Albert Ellis spoke about the three kinds of “musts.” Using the word “should” is conveying criticism, like “scolding” oneself (or others). The value statements implied by that word are arbitrary and relative. The laws of Nature do not follow any “should,” but instead are what they are, and we don't get a vote. Practice Rephrasing — replacing “should” with “is” or “does” or “I would prefer it if…” Reattribution — considering the alternative causes of events and behaviors. Positive Reframing — acknowledging that Should Statements come out of a very good place in you, that they reflect positive attributes and values, and that there is a helpful side to holding those beliefs. See Also , by Karen Horney , by Albert Ellis , the Online Etymology Dictionary  

Wusstet ihr, wie viele Frauen die Psychoanalyse mitgeprägt haben? Ich mache in der aktuellen Folge meines Podcasts auf vier Frauen neugierig, die mit oder nach Sigmund Freud die Psychoanalyse aus der Taufe gehoben haben: Lou André Salome, Anna Freud, Melanie Klein und Karen Horney. Jede auf ihre Art und mit einem besonderen Fokus eine wichtige Wegbereiterin für die Psychoanalyse. Hört rein und erzählt es gerne weiter!

ABOUT THIS SHOW: True Self / False Self. On this episode of Step by Step Toward Emotional Sobriety with Dr. Allen Berger we discuss our True Self and our False Self. Who we are meant to be and who we have become. We need to understand this vital information to truly enhance our recovery. References to Dr. Karen Horney who disagreed with Freud about inherent differences in the psychology of men and women, and she traced such differences to society and culture rather than biology.

In no other time and place was Freudian psychoanalysis more successful than in the first two Cold War decades in the US. This was also a time and place when psychoanalysis was intensely conservative – especially sexually conservative. In this lecture, Dagmar Herzog shows that the florid misogyny and homophobia were not merely products of generalized Cold War trends, but rather a side-effect of widely broadcast battles over the relationship between religion and psychoanalysis, as the “Jewish science” of psychoanalysis underwent a process of “Christianization” in the postwar US. In addition, tracing the arc from Karen Horney's Neurotic Personality of Our Time to Alfred Kinsey's Sexual Behavior in the Human Male, the lecture will explore how complex processes of de- and resexualization and profound ambivalence about the status and meaning of the concept of “libido” were at the heart of a succession of fierce rivalries that helped determine the directions taken by American Freudians – with consequences for the fate of Freudianism as a whole. Dagmar Herzog is Distinguished Professor of History at the Graduate Center, City University of New York. Her most recent books are Cold War Freud: Psychoanalysis in an Age of Catastrophes (Cambridge 2017), Unlearning Eugenics: Sexuality, Reproduction, and Disability in Post-Nazi Europe (Wisconsin 2018), and Lust und Verwundbarkeit: Zur Zeitgeschichte der Sexualität in Europa und den USA (Wallstein 2018).

Show introduction.An interrupted summary of this episode's topics, which focus on The They that influence our minds and bodies. Along the way, psychological phenomena such as the false consensus effect and pluralistic ignorance are explored. A worldwide survey of messages written to non-terrestrial intelligence is then utilized to provide a current example of the manner in which The They and pluralistic ignorance may have influenced the general worldview held by many people in the 21st Century. Experience this!47.193218, -122.296558 Practice phenomenology on the sounds from geographic locations throughout Washington State. An extended explanatory introduction leads this segment, which comes from 47.193218, -122.296558, at Sound Transit's Puyallup Station, in Puyallup Washington. Go here, and at just the right time, you'll hear the cosmos say the same thing. The cosmos speaks through all things, and in all ways.Being there.The They (Das Man).Being there is the way of being human. In this episode, we present Martin Heidegger's Das Man: The They. We explore the many ways in which these nameless/faceless others are internalized in our minds, bodies, and worldviews.One-hit wonders.Individuality and predictability.A song about the reach and potential influence of psychology in one's life, sung by Edmud version 1.0, and derived from Teh Dŭk!tər's lecture notes.What's happening?False consensus, pluralistic ignorance, and the they in each of us.The phenomena known in social psychology as the false consensus effect and pluralistic ignorance are utilized to further explore the particular ways in which our individual understandings of the thoughts and perspectives of The They may influence us in our daily lives. Music for our non-corporeal descendants.Dr. Karen Horney?Sung by Ana-is version 1.0. Inspired by Karen Horney’s theories; the zombie is a metaphor for the unconscious (though—for another's use of this metaphor—see the writings of V.S. Ramachandran). Lyrics are derived from Dr. Lower’s previous course lecture notes. Being here.Reflections on being human, by way of a multinational survey on what people might want to say to an extraterrestrial intelligence.The results of a previously conducted worldwide survey on what people might want to say to an extraterrestrial intelligence are utilized to illustrate a global example of pluralistic ignorance about human need, and what it means to be human.Advice from our human ancestors.Narcissus and you.Sung by G-or-G version 1.0. Inspired by Freud’s interpretation of the Narcissus myth. Lyrics are derived from Dr. Lower’s previous course lecture notes. More information on these show segments and previous episodes can be found on the show's website at: https://thenewphenomenologists.com

We sweat through a recording on one of the hottest days of the year to bring you more stories of badass women you should have heard of. Rebecca talks mental health and the work of Karen Horney and Rhea covers the explorer and mother Sally Poncet. We hope you enjoy! Rebecca & Rhea xx Recorded by Rebecca Hansell & Rhea Brooks Edited by Rebecca Hansell Intro music sourced on Filmstro.com See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Da skal vi tilbake til Lillesand for andre del av samtalen med Rebecca Wexelsen og boken hun har skrevet som heter «Hotell Montebello». Det er kveld - 28. mars 2019 - og vi har akkurat hatt en liten pause. Tema er død, ensomhet, sykdom, kreft og tilhørighet, og heldigvis brekkes alvoret opp med en god porsjon humor. Rebecca har nemlig skrevet en humoristisk bok om kreft, og det er kanskje ikke så vanlig. Dagbladet gir boken terningkast 5 og skriver følgende:«Tross det tunge temaet er dette en knapp og vittig bok. Gjennom jeg-personen Nina har Wexelsen laget et skarpt og humoristisk blikk på sykehustilværelsen. Spesielt den terapeutiske virkeligheten med sine mestrings- og motivasjonskurs, velvære- og sanserom. Eller skjemaet hun må fylle ut når hun sitter svimeslått etter behandlingen: «Jeg vet ikke hvor jeg skal plassere denne kroppen på en skala fra ingen slapphet til verst tenkelige slapphet, ingen frykt til verst tenkelige frykt når jeg ikke lenger klarer å huske den friske kroppen jeg skal sammenligne denne syke med».Avvæpnende om dødenLike tørrvittige er beskrivelsen av medpasientene, selvom de med fordel kunne vært mindre karikert. Blant annet medisinpusheren Tore som valser rundt i gangene med infusjonsstativet skranglende etter seg. Og Berit som jobber frivillig som likeverdsmenneske, og har funnet meningen ved livet gjennom å «svimerke de syke med sin medmenneskelighet».Selv har Wexelsen uttalt at hun lider av helseangst, og at boka er ment å få både leseren og henne selv til å ta døden mindre alvorlig. Det har hun klart. Med sine mange treffende bilder og vittige kjappe tone, virker «Hotell Montebello» avvæpnende på denne sykdommen vi alle frykter.»Dagens episode skal altså handle om både død, sykdom og ensomhet, men også hvordan vi skal klare å mestre livet på best mulig måte. Det var Iren Gressli Haugen som var ansvarlig for arrangementet, og hun hadde bestemt at overskriften på samtalen skulle være «Prosjekt: Å mestre livet». I andre del av samtalen forsøker vi derfor å spore inn på ulike perspektiver på mestring av livet, som for de fleste av oss kan være ganske utfordrende til tider, både med og uten kreft.I oppslaget til samtalen med Rebecca står det følgende om arrangementet:«I boken "Hotell Montebello" skriver Wexelsen om en hovedpersonen som får kreft og legges inn på Hotell Montebello for behandling. Da legene friskmelder henne, lyver hun på seg spredning. Hun vil bli værende på hotellet i stedet for å flytte ut og vende tilbake til livet. For det å mestre livet, det levende livet, er ikke bare enkelt. Når du er frisk, er det ingen som passer på deg; det forventes at du skal passe på deg selv. Du skal prestere og være morsom og sosial. Du skal tjene penger og ta eksamener og forelske deg i den rette og låne mens renten er lav og spise riktig, men ikke for mye, og trene riktig, men ikke for mye. Du skal feste og aldri gå glipp av noe, og drikke, men ikke for mye.»I denne episoden skal vi altså til Hotel Norge i Lillesand for andre del av samtalen om «Hotel Montebello». I siste del av dagens episode skal jeg igjen fordype meg litt i tematikken forankret i psykologifaget. Nærmere bestemt skal jeg snakke litt om Karen Horney og hvordan hun så på avstand og isolasjon som en slags psykisk forsvarsmekanisme med store omkostninger.Bli medlem av SinnSyns Mentale HelsestudioDitt bidrag kan øke kvaliteten på WebPsykologen og SinnSyn.Ved å støtte prosjektet, får du mange fordeler! Som Patreon supporter blir du medlem av SinnSyns Mentale Helsestudio. Det vil si flere episoder hver måned, tips og øvelser for trening av "mentale muskler", eksklusive videopptak og andre overraskelser. Les mer og bli medlem i på denne linken. Her kan du kjøpe bøkene fra Psykolog Sondre Liverød (WebPsykologen) til best pris og gratis frakt. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Da skal vi tilbake til Lillesand for andre del av samtalen med Rebecca Wexelsen og boken hun har skrevet som heter «Hotell Montebello». Det er kveld - 28. mars 2019 - og vi har akkurat hatt en liten pause. Tema er død, ensomhet, sykdom, kreft og tilhørighet, og heldigvis brekkes alvoret opp med en god porsjon humor. Rebecca har nemlig skrevet en humoristisk bok om kreft, og det er kanskje ikke så vanlig. Dagbladet gir boken terningkast 5 og skriver følgende:«Tross det tunge temaet er dette en knapp og vittig bok. Gjennom jeg-personen Nina har Wexelsen laget et skarpt og humoristisk blikk på sykehustilværelsen. Spesielt den terapeutiske virkeligheten med sine mestrings- og motivasjonskurs, velvære- og sanserom. Eller skjemaet hun må fylle ut når hun sitter svimeslått etter behandlingen: «Jeg vet ikke hvor jeg skal plassere denne kroppen på en skala fra ingen slapphet til verst tenkelige slapphet, ingen frykt til verst tenkelige frykt når jeg ikke lenger klarer å huske den friske kroppen jeg skal sammenligne denne syke med».Avvæpnende om dødenLike tørrvittige er beskrivelsen av medpasientene, selvom de med fordel kunne vært mindre karikert. Blant annet medisinpusheren Tore som valser rundt i gangene med infusjonsstativet skranglende etter seg. Og Berit som jobber frivillig som likeverdsmenneske, og har funnet meningen ved livet gjennom å «svimerke de syke med sin medmenneskelighet».Selv har Wexelsen uttalt at hun lider av helseangst, og at boka er ment å få både leseren og henne selv til å ta døden mindre alvorlig. Det har hun klart. Med sine mange treffende bilder og vittige kjappe tone, virker «Hotell Montebello» avvæpnende på denne sykdommen vi alle frykter.»Dagens episode skal altså handle om både død, sykdom og ensomhet, men også hvordan vi skal klare å mestre livet på best mulig måte. Det var Iren Gressli Haugen som var ansvarlig for arrangementet, og hun hadde bestemt at overskriften på samtalen skulle være «Prosjekt: Å mestre livet». I andre del av samtalen forsøker vi derfor å spore inn på ulike perspektiver på mestring av livet, som for de fleste av oss kan være ganske utfordrende til tider, både med og uten kreft.I oppslaget til samtalen med Rebecca står det følgende om arrangementet:«I boken "Hotell Montebello" skriver Wexelsen om en hovedpersonen som får kreft og legges inn på Hotell Montebello for behandling. Da legene friskmelder henne, lyver hun på seg spredning. Hun vil bli værende på hotellet i stedet for å flytte ut og vende tilbake til livet. For det å mestre livet, det levende livet, er ikke bare enkelt. Når du er frisk, er det ingen som passer på deg; det forventes at du skal passe på deg selv. Du skal prestere og være morsom og sosial. Du skal tjene penger og ta eksamener og forelske deg i den rette og låne mens renten er lav og spise riktig, men ikke for mye, og trene riktig, men ikke for mye. Du skal feste og aldri gå glipp av noe, og drikke, men ikke for mye.»I denne episoden skal vi altså til Hotel Norge i Lillesand for andre del av samtalen om «Hotel Montebello». I siste del av dagens episode skal jeg igjen fordype meg litt i tematikken forankret i psykologifaget. Nærmere bestemt skal jeg snakke litt om Karen Horney og hvordan hun så på avstand og isolasjon som en slags psykisk forsvarsmekanisme med store omkostninger.Bli medlem av SinnSyns Mentale HelsestudioDitt bidrag kan øke kvaliteten på WebPsykologen og SinnSyn.Ved å støtte prosjektet, får du mange fordeler! Som Patreon supporter blir du medlem av SinnSyns Mentale Helsestudio. Det vil si flere episoder hver måned, tips og øvelser for trening av "mentale muskler", eksklusive videopptak og andre overraskelser. Les mer og bli medlem i på denne linken. Her kan du kjøpe bøkene fra Psykolog Sondre Liverød (WebPsykologen) til best pris og gratis frakt. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Intro/Outro: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=--YiHE-06Rw (flowers in narnia) We kick off this episode with a discussion about speakers not getting paid at the International Enneagram Conference and then dive into what it's like to be a self-preservation 5. We talk about: Hermit life, being the most detached variant out of the three and how that may show up What it might feel like for a self-pres 5 to owe anything to somebody The self-pres 5 being “very good at boundaries” How the passion of avarice shows up in the 5 a 5s active thinking voice Themes of separation, detachment, non-attachment Self-pres 5s apparently being thinner out of all the variants - is that true? Email us and let us know enneagramforidiots@gmail.com What do you focus on the most out of these things? How do you find yourself focusing on these things: food, housing, health, physical comfort, money, your body? Also a couple of additional notes: A correction: Karen Horney influenced the coping style triads of the Enneagram (moving against 3-7-8, moving towards 1-2-6 and moving away from others/the world 4-5-9) but according to many resources, did not relate these concepts to the Enneagram herself. Claudio Naranjo apparently was one of the first teachers to use some of her theories in the Enneagram and many other authors did as well, connecting Horney’s theories and the 9 types together. The last 5 minutes of the podcast was cut off so we’ll do the wrap up on the next episode (new equipment and training is expensive, and right now we’re trying to work with what we’ve got here). Resources: Enneagram Central, Self-reported people talkin’ on Reddit, Wisdom of the Enneagram, Some quotables from Beatrice Chestnut and Russ Hudson, Enneagram Institute message boards, Karen Horney: Our Inner Conflicts: A Constructive Theory Of Neurosis, our brains

This episode Megan & Milena cover German neo-Freudian psychoanalyst Karen Horney and American Abstract Expressionism painter Lee Krasner. The post Ep. 15 Not All About Sex & 130$ Million Short appeared first on My Favorite Feminists.

Dr. Blumenfield interview Dr. Ingram, Medical Director of the Karen Horney Institute and Clinic 

This is a preview of a recent premium episode available in full only to Patreon subscribers at the $5 per month level. Click over to https://www.patreon.com/posts/23590464 and subcribe to become a Champagne Sharks premium member to access this full episode as well as 70+ bonus episodes not available to non-subscribers. This is a double episode that we are counting as two episodes, and it's a little bit different than usual. Today we have Teen Sheng (http://twitter.com/Mont_Jiang) joining me from the podcast Escape from Plan A (https://planamag.com/podcast/home) to discuss a new Korean movie we recently saw, Lee Chang-dong's Burning. After the movie, we had a pretty intense conversation about it and tied it into Carl Jung, Joseph Campbell, Fight Club, Star Wars, Karen Horney, and Jordan Peterson. It's quite a departure, but we hope you like it. Discussed in this episode: The Collected Works of C. G. Jung, Vol. 7: Two Essays on Analytical Psychology by Carl Jung https://amzn.to/2GGhNL5  Haruki Murakami's original "Barn Burning" short story https://www.mrflamm.com/uploads/2/2/0/0/2200902/barnburningbyharukimurakami.pdf The Symbolic Life: Miscellaneous Writings (The Collected Works of C. G. Jung, Volume 18) by Carl Jung https://amzn.to/2BJ0N17  "Carl Jung discussing Anima Projection" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uIYvz4LuEYA  "How Burning Captures the Toll of Extreme Inequality in South Korea" https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2018/11/burning-movie-imagines-working-class-anxiety-south-korea-lee-chang-dong/575773/  A Closer Look at Carl Jung’s Individuation Process: A Map for Psychic Wholeness https://scottjeffrey.com/individuation-process-jungian-psychology/  "The 4 Major Jungian Archetypes" https://www.verywellmind.com/what-are-jungs-4-major-archetypes-2795439  Analytical Psychology on Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analytical_psychology  Karen Horney Wikipedia page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karen_Horney  "Karen Horney's Vision of the Self" https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/a3e8/84090e1ab763bab0ead9a243247003196e54.pdf  "Fight Club and Owning Your Shadow" https://www.thecrucibleproject.org/fight-club-owning-shadow/  "Fight Club Characters: Analysis of the Shadow Archetype and Its Impact on the Protagonist in Fight Club" https://donguselsaptamalar.wordpress.com/2015/08/03/analysis-of-the-shadow-archetype-and-its-impact-on-the-protagonist-in-fight-club/  "Jordan Peterson, Masculinity, Jung and the Alt-Right." by Jacques Legault https://medium.com/@jacquesrlegault/jordan-peterson-masculinity-jung-and-the-alt-right-c8f07168901  "AI, Jordan Peterson’s Fight Club and the Alt-Right." by Jacques Legault https://hackernoon.com/ai-jordan-petersons-fight-club-and-the-alt-right-ff366fa736e8  The Beginner's Guide to Jungian Psychology by Robin Robertson https://amzn.to/2CD1MS4  Owning Your Own Shadow by Robert Johnson https://amzn.to/2SqjGgn  The Shadow's Gift: Find Out Who You Really Are by Robin Robertson https://amzn.to/2SpvO1t  Neurosis and Human Growth by Karen Horney https://amzn.to/2QWbdoA  The Writer's Journey by Chrstopher Vogler https://amzn.to/2Cgr4UK 7 Basic Plots by Christopher Booker https://amzn.to/2M1DRin On Bullshit by Harry Frankfurt https://amzn.to/2SNWNDW Regarding the movie "Taxi Driver" and the screenwriter's shadow's role in the creation of it: https://www.theguardian.com/film/2006/jul/06/features.geoffreymacnab Stanton Peele's Love and Addiction https://amzn.to/2SQGI0s Dunning-Kruger Effect https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Dunning-Kruger_effect Beyond Culture by Edward T. Hall https://amzn.to/2RM98LP "Decompensation of a Narcissist" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cHoyQd8JhiE

David Frum is a staff writer at The Atlantic and the author of Trumpocracy: The Corruption of the American Republic. In 2001 and 2002, he was a speechwriter for President George W. Bush.   We met in Ottawa and talked about, among other things, his father Murray, a Bernini bronze, African art, reference books, Linda Frum's biography of her (and David's), mother Barbara, the mistrust of optimism, Marcel Proust's Remembrance of Things Past and women, loyalty, how to become an expert in almost anything, the shock of the Great Depression, 2008, immigration, the deterioration of democracy, the role of political books, Trumpocracy, discovery and threats to sue, Trump: The Novel, the Whitehouse Correspondence Dinner, humiliation as a theme, laughter, Bin Laden, moral development and dilemma, Nick Carraway, publishers' advances, David's novel Patriots, Generals Mattis and McMaster, lying, Tom Wolfe, Donald Trump, vanity, Obama, Karen Horney, negative economics, mobilized voters, the Saudis, Trump towers, tax avoidance, Wikileaks, Putin, Deutsche Bank, Stephen Greenblatt's Tyrant, Shakespeare, Presidents born to great wealth, and standing up for the right thing.  

In today's audiobook excerpt from Supercoach, I share one of the "secrets" my clients tell me has made the biggest difference in their lives and a simple exercise to help clarify your inner wisdom from what Karen Horney called "the inner tyrant - the voice of the should".

Enneagram Threes, or The Achievers, see a world in which people only value others for what they can do versus for who they are. They tend to be driven, task-oriented, visionaries, goal crushers who want to avoid failure at all costs.  Threes are very concerned with what other people think of them and are able to look in anybody’s eyes and respond instinctively to whether or not they're being approved or disapproved of in the moment, and then tweaking or projecting a specific image to make sure they stay in approval. But sometimes Threes have a hard time settling in on their type because the underlying motivation doesn’t seem to fit quite right. We’ve talked about subtypes and how they can make a type look and act in three different ways. But, another way we learn about people in their types is through, what are called, Hornevian groups, based on the work of Karen Horney, or stances. What they indicate for us is the social style of each type, or the direction we move in, in relationship to people. There are three styles: the assertive stance, the withdrawing stance, and the earning stance.  In today’s episode, Miles Adcox joins Ian to talk about each stance and how knowing your stance can help you find your type. Miles Adcox is an entrepreneur, speaker, host, and coach. He is the Owner and CEO of Onsite, an internationally-known emotional wellness lifestyle brand that delivers life-changing personal growth workshops, inspiring content, leadership retreats, and emotional treatment. He and Onsite have been featured on 20/20, Good Morning America, New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Dr. Phil Show, and The Doctors. He is the founder and co-host of The Unspoken Podcast, the owner of Onsite Music Publishing and founder of Inspire Productions. Miles has created and managed multiple mental health programs, personal growth workshops, and speaks nationally on mental health, emotional wellness and leadership. Miles has been a featured speaker and facilitator at various international events including Random House; O-The Oprah Magazine’s Rising Strong Day with Dr. Brené Brown and TEDx. He has consulted major brands on organizational health and emotional wellness and is a communication, personal growth, and mental health consultant to the entertainment industry. He works with and consults several NGO’s and serves on the board of The Onsite Foundation, C4, Dream 514, and is an advisory board member for Musicians on Call. Miles has currently been selected to take part in the Leadership Music class of 2019.

‘Create two, three—many Freuds!' That, Dagmar Herzog shows, was the forgotten slogan of the Cold War. With Cold War Freud: Psychoanalysis in an Age of Catastrophes (Cambridge University Press, 2017), Prof. Herzog carries forward the groundbreaking research program into the politics of desire that already brought us Sex After Fascism: Memory and Morality in Twentieth-Century Germany and Sex in Crisis: The New Sexual Revolution and The Future of American Politics. The book offers fresh readings of the work of such titanic (and sadly misunderstood) figures as Karen Horney, Robert Stoller, Félix Guattari and Konrad Lorenz—and it will change the way you think about trauma, libido and the New Left. Our conversation focused primarily on the radical currents in Cold War psychoanalysis and what happens when the world comes crashing through the bedroom window. David Gutherz is a Ph.D. Candidate in the Committee on Social Thought at the University of Chicago. His research centers on the history of the human sciences and revolutionary politics, with a special interest in Fascist and Post-Fascist Italy. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

‘Create two, three—many Freuds!' That, Dagmar Herzog shows, was the forgotten slogan of the Cold War. With Cold War Freud: Psychoanalysis in an Age of Catastrophes (Cambridge University Press, 2017), Prof. Herzog carries forward the groundbreaking research program into the politics of desire that already brought us Sex After Fascism: Memory and Morality in Twentieth-Century Germany and Sex in Crisis: The New Sexual Revolution and The Future of American Politics. The book offers fresh readings of the work of such titanic (and sadly misunderstood) figures as Karen Horney, Robert Stoller, Félix Guattari and Konrad Lorenz—and it will change the way you think about trauma, libido and the New Left. Our conversation focused primarily on the radical currents in Cold War psychoanalysis and what happens when the world comes crashing through the bedroom window. David Gutherz is a Ph.D. Candidate in the Committee on Social Thought at the University of Chicago. His research centers on the history of the human sciences and revolutionary politics, with a special interest in Fascist and Post-Fascist Italy.

‘Create two, three—many Freuds!’ That, Dagmar Herzog shows, was the forgotten slogan of the Cold War. With Cold War Freud: Psychoanalysis in an Age of Catastrophes (Cambridge University Press, 2017), Prof. Herzog carries forward the groundbreaking research program into the politics of desire that already brought us Sex After Fascism: Memory and Morality in Twentieth-Century Germany and Sex in Crisis: The New Sexual Revolution and The Future of American Politics. The book offers fresh readings of the work of such titanic (and sadly misunderstood) figures as Karen Horney, Robert Stoller, Félix Guattari and Konrad Lorenz—and it will change the way you think about trauma, libido and the New Left. Our conversation focused primarily on the radical currents in Cold War psychoanalysis and what happens when the world comes crashing through the bedroom window. David Gutherz is a Ph.D. Candidate in the Committee on Social Thought at the University of Chicago. His research centers on the history of the human sciences and revolutionary politics, with a special interest in Fascist and Post-Fascist Italy. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

‘Create two, three—many Freuds!' That, Dagmar Herzog shows, was the forgotten slogan of the Cold War. With Cold War Freud: Psychoanalysis in an Age of Catastrophes (Cambridge University Press, 2017), Prof. Herzog carries forward the groundbreaking research program into the politics of desire that already brought us Sex After Fascism: Memory and Morality in Twentieth-Century Germany and Sex in Crisis: The New Sexual Revolution and The Future of American Politics. The book offers fresh readings of the work of such titanic (and sadly misunderstood) figures as Karen Horney, Robert Stoller, Félix Guattari and Konrad Lorenz—and it will change the way you think about trauma, libido and the New Left. Our conversation focused primarily on the radical currents in Cold War psychoanalysis and what happens when the world comes crashing through the bedroom window. David Gutherz is a Ph.D. Candidate in the Committee on Social Thought at the University of Chicago. His research centers on the history of the human sciences and revolutionary politics, with a special interest in Fascist and Post-Fascist Italy. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/psychoanalysis

‘Create two, three—many Freuds!’ That, Dagmar Herzog shows, was the forgotten slogan of the Cold War. With Cold War Freud: Psychoanalysis in an Age of Catastrophes (Cambridge University Press, 2017), Prof. Herzog carries forward the groundbreaking research program into the politics of desire that already brought us Sex After Fascism: Memory and Morality in Twentieth-Century Germany and Sex in Crisis: The New Sexual Revolution and The Future of American Politics. The book offers fresh readings of the work of such titanic (and sadly misunderstood) figures as Karen Horney, Robert Stoller, Félix Guattari and Konrad Lorenz—and it will change the way you think about trauma, libido and the New Left. Our conversation focused primarily on the radical currents in Cold War psychoanalysis and what happens when the world comes crashing through the bedroom window. David Gutherz is a Ph.D. Candidate in the Committee on Social Thought at the University of Chicago. His research centers on the history of the human sciences and revolutionary politics, with a special interest in Fascist and Post-Fascist Italy. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

‘Create two, three—many Freuds!’ That, Dagmar Herzog shows, was the forgotten slogan of the Cold War. With Cold War Freud: Psychoanalysis in an Age of Catastrophes (Cambridge University Press, 2017), Prof. Herzog carries forward the groundbreaking research program into the politics of desire that already brought us Sex After Fascism: Memory and Morality in Twentieth-Century Germany and Sex in Crisis: The New Sexual Revolution and The Future of American Politics. The book offers fresh readings of the work of such titanic (and sadly misunderstood) figures as Karen Horney, Robert Stoller, Félix Guattari and Konrad Lorenz—and it will change the way you think about trauma, libido and the New Left. Our conversation focused primarily on the radical currents in Cold War psychoanalysis and what happens when the world comes crashing through the bedroom window. David Gutherz is a Ph.D. Candidate in the Committee on Social Thought at the University of Chicago. His research centers on the history of the human sciences and revolutionary politics, with a special interest in Fascist and Post-Fascist Italy. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

‘Create two, three—many Freuds!’ That, Dagmar Herzog shows, was the forgotten slogan of the Cold War. With Cold War Freud: Psychoanalysis in an Age of Catastrophes (Cambridge University Press, 2017), Prof. Herzog carries forward the groundbreaking research program into the politics of desire that already brought us Sex After Fascism: Memory and Morality in Twentieth-Century Germany and Sex in Crisis: The New Sexual Revolution and The Future of American Politics. The book offers fresh readings of the work of such titanic (and sadly misunderstood) figures as Karen Horney, Robert Stoller, Félix Guattari and Konrad Lorenz—and it will change the way you think about trauma, libido and the New Left. Our conversation focused primarily on the radical currents in Cold War psychoanalysis and what happens when the world comes crashing through the bedroom window. David Gutherz is a Ph.D. Candidate in the Committee on Social Thought at the University of Chicago. His research centers on the history of the human sciences and revolutionary politics, with a special interest in Fascist and Post-Fascist Italy. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

‘Create two, three—many Freuds!’ That, Dagmar Herzog shows, was the forgotten slogan of the Cold War. With Cold War Freud: Psychoanalysis in an Age of Catastrophes (Cambridge University Press, 2017), Prof. Herzog carries forward the groundbreaking research program into the politics of desire that already brought us Sex After Fascism: Memory and Morality in Twentieth-Century Germany and Sex in Crisis: The New Sexual Revolution and The Future of American Politics. The book offers fresh readings of the work of such titanic (and sadly misunderstood) figures as Karen Horney, Robert Stoller, Félix Guattari and Konrad Lorenz—and it will change the way you think about trauma, libido and the New Left. Our conversation focused primarily on the radical currents in Cold War psychoanalysis and what happens when the world comes crashing through the bedroom window. David Gutherz is a Ph.D. Candidate in the Committee on Social Thought at the University of Chicago. His research centers on the history of the human sciences and revolutionary politics, with a special interest in Fascist and Post-Fascist Italy. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The way that you think creates the way you feel. If you have great thoughts then no problem, but if your thoughts are a little distorted, then...look out! Wouldn’t it be great if there were an easy way to look at your thoughts...and change them? As it turns out - there is! In today’s conversation we are going to show you how to identify the kinds of thoughts that lead to depression, anxiety, shame, anger, and self-doubt - and talk about the process that you can go through to eliminate those thoughts for good. Our guest is Dr. David Burns, author of the acclaimed bestseller Feeling Good and one of the leading popularizers of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT). He is also the creator of TEAM therapy, which takes CBT to the next level. Today, David Burns and I are tackling the topic of “cognitive distortions” - the messed-up thinking that can get you stuck in negative emotions. By the end of today’s episode you’ll not only be able to spot the times when your thinking gets distorted, but you’ll know what to do about it so that you can “feel good”. If you want to listen to our first episode together, where David Burns and I spoke about how to apply his work in relationships (based on his book Feeling Good Together), here is a link to Episode 98: How to Stop Being a Victim - Feeling Good Together - with David Burns And, as always, I’m looking forward to your thoughts on this episode and what revelations and questions it creates for you. Join us in the Relationship Alive Community on Facebook to chat about it! Resources: Check out Dr. David Burns's website Read David’s classic books, Feeling Good or When Panic Attacks FREE Relationship Communication Secrets Guide www.neilsattin.com/feelinggood2 Visit to download the transcript, or text “PASSION” to 33444 and follow the instructions to download the transcript to this episode with David Burns Amazing intro/outro music graciously provided courtesy of: The Railsplitters - Check them Out Transcript Neil Sattin: Hello and welcome to another episode of Relationship Alive. This is your host Neil Sattin. On today's show, we're going to cover ways that your thinking can be distorted. And, by being distorted can impact the way you feel, the way you behave, the way you interact with other people, and basically get in the way of you being an effectively functioning human being. Neil Sattin: I'm talking about cognitive distortions and they've been mentioned a little bit on the show before, but I wanted to take this opportunity to dive deeply into the ways that our thinking can just be messed up. From that messed upness - and no that is not a technical term -  comes all sorts of problems. Neil Sattin: From today's show, what my hope is for you is that you understand these things well enough so that you can spot them happening in your own thinking and perhaps in the thinking and reasoning of those around you. We're going to talk about effective strategies for changing the pattern. Neil Sattin: In order to do that, we have with us today a fortunate return visit from Dr. David Burns who was on the show back in episode 98 where we talked about how to stop being a victim in your relationship. This was an episode that was all based on David's work in a book called Feeling Good Together. Neil Sattin: If you're interested in hearing that, you can go to neilsattin.com/feelinggood. What I wanted to talk about today relates to some of the pioneering work that David did in popularizing cognitive behavioral therapy primarily through his book Feeling Good which has sold millions of copies all over the world and has been prescribed and shown to actually help people with depression simply by reading the book and going through the exercises. Neil Sattin: I'm very excited to have David with us today, we're going to talk about cognitive distortions, we're probably going to touch on TEAM therapy which is his latest evolution that's attacking some of the problems with cognitive behavioral therapy. And hear about some of the amazing results that that's getting and get some insight into how that even works. Neil Sattin: Without any further ado, let us dive right in. David Burns, thank you so much for joining us again here on Relationship Alive. David Burns: Thanks Neil, I'm absolutely delighted to be on your podcast for two reasons. First, I think you're a tremendous host. You know your stuff both technically and you know my background, you do your homework, that's very flattering to me being interviewed, but also you seem to exude a lot of warmth and integrity, just a pleasure to hang out with you a little bit today and your many, many listeners. Neil Sattin: Thank you. Thank you so much. I appreciate your saying that. This stuff is important to me. I'm hoping that this podcast makes a big difference in the world and the way that we do that is through being able to feature amazing work like what you do. I don't want to forget to mention that you also have your own podcast, the Feeling Good Podcast that has amazing insight into the work that you're doing. Neil Sattin: In fact, you record sessions with people so people can actually hear you working with clients and then explaining how you did what you did and also getting direct feedback from the people that you're working with. That's a fascinating show and how many episodes have you put out at this point? David Burns: I think Fabrice and I are up to roughly 60, in the range of 60. One really neat bit of feedback we're getting is that a lot of therapists now are requiring their patients to listen to the Feeling Good podcasts. There's been a lot of research on my book Feeling Good: The New Mood Therapy and studies have shown that if you just hand the book to someone with moderate to severe depression, 60% of them ... 65% of them will improve dramatically within four weeks. David Burns: That's really, really good news. It's called bibliotherapy or reading therapy, but now we're getting this ... I'm getting the same kind of feedback from people who are listening to the podcasts and saying that just listening to the Feeling Good Podcast had a dramatic effect on their depression or their obsessive compulsive disorder or whatever is bothering them. I'm hoping that that trend will continue. Neil Sattin: Yeah, someone's going to have to study podcastio-therapy. David Burns: Yeah, right. You may be having the same thing Neil on your relationship broadcast from people with troubled relationships following the information and the techniques you're providing and perhaps experiencing genuine improvement in their relationships, greater intimacy and love. Neil Sattin: Absolutely. I'm getting that kind of feedback all the time from listeners and I also hear that therapists, particularly couples therapists are having their clients listen to the show and even sometimes prescribing specific episodes for them to listen to. It feels really good to be able to be an adjunct part of people's progress and therapy. David Burns: Congrats. That's great. That's a real credit to the quality of what you're offering. Neil Sattin: Thank you. Thank you. Well, let's dive in. Enough kudos although it does feel really good, though I guess that doesn't surprise me considering you're the author of Feeling Good. Quick point of clarification. Is it the just handing of the Feeling Good book that has a 60 to 65% improvement rate or did the people actually have to read some of it to get that? David Burns: All they have to do is touch it. The improvement comes through osmosis and many of those who have read it have gotten worse. They don't have good data on that in the studies. It's people coming to a medical center for the treatment of depression and in the original studies, they said that they had to be on a waiting list for four weeks and during the four weeks, read this book. David Burns: Then they continued to test them every week with various depression tests and half the patients went to some kind of control group who were on a waiting list control for four weeks or they gave them some other book to read like Viktor Frankl's book Man's Search for Meaning and in all of the studies, the patients who were given a copy of Feeling Good, two thirds of them had improved so much within four weeks that they didn't need to have treatment anymore at the medical center. David Burns: They never got antidepressants or psychotherapy. Then they've done follow up, up to two year follow up studies on these patients as well. For the most part, they've continued to do well or even improve more and have not had significant relapses. The alternative groups who got Victor Frankl's book did not show significant improvement or people on waiting list control. David Burns: They were pretty well done studies sponsored by research from ... sponsored by National Institute of Mental Health and other research groups. Forrest Scogin is a clinical psychologist at University of Alabama and he pioneered a lot of these studies, but there have been probably at least a dozen replications of that finding that have been published now with teenagers, with elderly people and with people in between. Neil Sattin: Yeah, I want to just say, your book despite having been published a little while ago now is eminently readable and I did read it a while ago. In fact, I think it was one of the first "self-help books" that I stumbled across probably around when I was graduating from college. In sitting down and revisiting it in preparation for our conversation today, I was just struck by how personable, for a book that's about cognitive behavioral therapy which is something that I think just calling it that probably turns a lot of people off. David Burns: You bet. Neil Sattin: The truth is that reading it through, it just makes so much sense and I love how you bring humor into the subject and in many ways talk about yourself as an author in some of the quizzes around the kind of thoughts that undermine our self-esteem. Anyway, I definitely recommend it. Neil Sattin: If you're not one of the millions of people who have already read it, you should pick it up and if you are, I would suggest picking it up again to just glean again what more is there. We're going to talk about one of the central topics in the book which is how our thinking affects the way we feel. Neil Sattin: Maybe we just start there because that was one place where I even in upon revisiting, I got a little confused and in the past, that's made total sense to me. Yeah of course, I make something mean something and that gives me an emotional response to it which ironically makes me think of Victor Frankl's work. Neil Sattin: At the same time, I know that we have feelings that just our bodies kick in with emotional responses in a split second when something happens. That seems to precede thought. How do you parse that apart in a way that makes sense? David Burns: Well, the basis of cognitive therapy and we've moved on to something new called TEAM therapy or TEAM CBT, but I think the basis of cognitive therapy which as far as it goes it's still pure gold goes back to the Buddha 2,500 years ago and to the Greek philosophers like Epictetus 2,000 years ago that humans are disturbed not by things, but by the views we take of them that you have to interpret an event in a particular way before you can have an emotional reaction to it. David Burns: This thought is so basic that our thoughts create all of our moods. We create our emotional reality at every moment of every day by the way, we interpret things, but that's such a basic idea that many people can't get it or they don't believe it. I had an example of this at my workshop in the east coast recently - I was in a hotel. David Burns: I've had many afflictions myself in my life. I love to treat people with depression or anxiety because whatever they have I could say, "Oh, I've been there myself." I can show you the way out of the woods, but when I was little, I had the fear of heights and then I got over it completely as a teenager through a high school teacher who had me stand on the top of a tall ladder until my fear disappeared and took about 15 minutes and it was dramatically effective. David Burns: Suddenly, my anxiety went from 100 to zero and I was free, but it crept back in because I stopped going up on heights not out avoidance, just I had no reason to and then suddenly I realized it had returned. I was on a hotel on one of these glass elevators and I was going up to the 14th floor and I was looking down into the elevator and I had no emotional reaction whatsoever and it was because I was telling myself and this was automatic I guess, but you're safe. David Burns: However, if there hadn't been that glass there and it would have been the same elevator going up and looking out, I would have been paralyzed with fear and terror and it would have been a total body experience that I can feel in my whole body this extreme terror. That's the first idea that you can't have an emotional reaction without having some kind of thought or interpretation. David Burns: You feel the way you think - your thoughts create all of your moods. After Feeling Good came out, I got a letter from a therapist in Philadelphia. He was a student therapist at the Philadelphia Marriage Counsel I believe and he said he had read my book Feeling Good: How Your Thoughts Create All of Your Moods. David Burns: He said, "Well, that's a great idea, but how can it be true? If you're on a railroad track with a train coming and you're about to get killed, you're going to feel terrified. You don't have to put a thought in your mind, it's just an automatic reaction." He said, "I don't believe your claim that only your thoughts can create your moods." David Burns: I got that letter and I started thinking, I said, "Gosh, what he's saying is so obvious, how could I have missed that when I wrote that book?" I felt embarrassed and ashamed. A couple days after I got that letter, I was in a taxi coming home from the airport and at a certain place on River Road, you go over this railroad track. David Burns: I looked down the railroad track, I saw there was a car driving on the railroad track at about two miles an hour. Bumpety-bumpety-bump. I looked then in the other direction and this is ... Freight trains come through here, they never stop, they come at 65 miles an hour. I saw one about a mile and a half in the other direction. David Burns: I said, "Man, that guy is going to get smashed by the train." I told the taxi driver, "Stop, I got to try to get that guy off the railroad tracks." I ran up and knocked on the window and he rolled down the window and there's this older man there and he said, "Can you please direct me to City Line Avenue?" David Burns: I said, "City Line Avenue is 10 miles in the other direction, but you're on the railroad tracks and there's a train coming. You've got to back up. Back up to get to the road." Because he was beyond the road, where you know how they have a pile of rocks at the railroad tracks, that's where he was and I said, "Back up, I'm going to get you off the railroad tracks." David Burns: He backed up and he kept ... When he got to the road, I said, "Now turn, turn your car." Finally I had them positioned to where just the nose of the car, the front part of the car was over the tracks and I was standing in front of it. Now the train was about maybe 20 seconds from impact and they had their whistle on. David Burns: I was waving my hands like, "Back up, back up. Just back up five feet and it will save you." Instead, the guy started creeping forward very slowly. Neil Sattin: Oh no. David Burns: The train smashed into him at the side of his car at about 60 miles an hour. Neil Sattin: Oh my goodness. David Burns: Actually ripped the car in half. The front compartment was thrown about 30 feet from the tracks. They had their brakes on, the train was skidding to a stop and I ran over again to the driver's compartment and looked in, it was all smashed windows and I thought I'd see a decapitated corpse, but it hit probably an inch behind his head and it hit so fast it had just cut the car in half and he didn't seem to be that injured or anything. David Burns: He looked at me and smiled and said, "Which way exactly did you say now to City Line Avenue?" I said, "You got to be kidding me." I said, "You were just hit by a train." He said, "I was not." He says, "That's ridiculous." I said, "Oh yeah, what happened to the windows of your car?" David Burns: Then he looked and he noticed all the windows were smashed and there was glass all over. Then he says, "Gosh, it looks like somebody broke my windows." I said, "Look, where's the back seat? Where's the back half of your car?" He turned around and he saw the back half of his car was missing. David Burns: He looked at me and he says, "I think you're right. Half of my car seems to have disappeared." He says, "Where is this train?" I said, "Look, it's right there, it's 20 feet from here." Now the conductors were rushing up and the engineers and he looked at me and he says, "This is great." David Burns: I said, "Why is that? Why is this great?" He says, "Well, maybe I can sue." I said, "You'll be lucky if they don't sue you. You were driving down the railroad tracks." I couldn't understand it and at this point, the police cars came, the ambulance, they put him in an ambulance, I gave my story to the police, he looked just fine and they took him to the Bryn Mawr Hospital. David Burns: I was just scratching my head and I got in the taxi, it was just a mile from home, the taxi driver took me the rest of the way home. I was saying, "What in the heck happened?" The next day I was jogging around that same corner, of course, there was all this litter from the car or broken pieces of metal and glass all over the place and there was a younger guy maybe 50 years old or something like that going through the rubble. David Burns: I stopped there and asked him who he was and he says, "My father was almost killed by a train here yesterday and somebody saved his life and I was just checking out the scene." I said, "Well, that was me actually." I said, "I didn't understand it -  he was driving down the railroad track and if I hadn't gotten there, I think he would have been killed." David Burns: I said, "Why was he driving down the railroad track?" He says, "Well, my father has had Alzheimer's disease and he lost his driver's license 10 years ago, but he forgot and after dinner, he snuck out. He grabbed the keys and snuck out, decided to take the car for a drive." Here is the same situation, a train about to kill somebody on a railroad track about to smash into you and I had the thought this guy is in danger he could be killed. David Burns: I was experiencing 100% terror and anxiety and fear, but his thought was different. His thought was, "This is great. I might be able to sue and get a great deal of money." Therefore he was feeling joy and euphoria. Same situation, different thoughts and radically different emotions. David Burns: That's what I mean and that's what the Buddha meant 2,500 years ago when we say that only your thoughts can create your emotions. It's not what happens to you, but the way you think about it that creates every positive and negative emotion. Neil Sattin: Did you ever write back to that person who wrote you? About that train - to tell him what had happened? David Burns: I don't remember it because this was way back in 1980 shortly after the book came out. I probably did because in those days, I was so excited to get a fan letter. I never had any idea that the book would become popular, it didn't hit the best-seller list until eight years after it was published because the publishers wouldn't support it with any marketing or advertising because they thought no one would ever want to read a book on depression. David Burns: When I got a letter in the days before email, I would get so excited and I would try to contact the person and sometimes talk to them for an hour or two on the telephone thinking this might be the only fan I'll ever have. I'm sure I did write back. Neil Sattin: Speaking of that, this might be a good chance to start talking about the cognitive distortions and like the idea that this might be the only fan that you ever have, what are we talking about in terms of now we've established pretty well. The way I think about things is going to determine how I feel. Neil Sattin: Yet, there are these distorted ways of thinking about the world that really have an enormously negative impact on our ability to function and interact. David Burns: This is one of the amazing ideas of cognitive therapy that at first I didn't quite grasp, but the early cognitive therapists like Albert Ellis from New York and then Aaron Beck at University of Pennsylvania who I learned it from were claiming not only do your thoughts create all of your moods, but when you're upset, when you're depressed, when you're anxious, when you feel ashamed or excessively angry or hopeless, not only are those feelings created by your thoughts and not by the circumstances of your life, but those negative thoughts will generally be distorted and illogical so that when you're depressed, you're fooling yourself, you're telling yourself things that simply aren't true and that depression and anxiety are really the world's oldest cons. David Burns: Beck - when I first began learning about cognitive therapy from him when I was a psychiatric resident and postdoctoral fellow, he had about four distortions as I recall and he had big names for them and then I added some to those and I used to talk to my patients about all-or-nothing thinking and overgeneralization and self-blame and the different ones. David Burns: Once, I was having a session with a patient and he said, "Why don't you list your 10 distortions and hand it out to patients?" He said, "It would make it so much easier for us." I thought, "Wow, that is a cool idea." I ran home that night after work and I made the list of the 10 cognitive distortions and that's what led to my book Feeling Good. David Burns: My list of 10 cognitive distortions, it's probably been reproduced in magazines and by therapists all over the world, I would imagine easily millions of times and probably tens of millions of times, but there are 10 distortions. Number one is all-or-nothing thinking, black or white thinking. David Burns: It's where you think about yourself in black or white term, shades of gray don't exist. If you're not a total success, you think that you're a complete failure or you tell yourself you're defective. I gave a workshop with Dr. Beck at one of the professional conferences like the Association for Behavioral and Cognitive Therapies, cognitive therapy had just come out and Beck is not a very good public speaker. David Burns: I was a novice also at the time and we had a half day workshop and there were a few hundred therapists there and it was okay, but it wasn't great and they started challenging us because nobody liked the idea of cognitive therapy initially, it was scorned and looked down on. We got defensive and then afterwards Dr. Beck looked at me and said, "David, you look like you're feeling down. What's the problem?" David Burns: I said, "Well, to tell you the truth Dr. Beck, I thought we were below average in this presentation and I'm feeling upset about that." He said, "Oh, well you should, if we were below average, you should thank your lucky stars." I said, "Why should I thank my lucky stars if we were below average?" David Burns: He said, "Because average is the halfway point. By definition, we have to be below average half the time. We can thank our lucky stars we got the below average one out of the way and we look forward to an above average one the next time we present." Suddenly, my discouragement disappeared. David Burns: He was just modeling thinking in shades of gray whereas I had been thinking in black and white terms. All-or-nothing thinking is very common in depression and it's also the cause of all perfectionism - thinking if you're not the greatest, second best or average just is not good enough, it's either the world or nothing, perfection or failure and it creates tremendous problems. Neil Sattin: Yeah, I could see that also coming up in terms of comparisons like if so and so is already doing this thing, I can't possibly do that because it's so and so's domain. As if one person could own the domain for the entire world in any particular area. David Burns: Well yeah, that's another mental trick that we play in ourselves with the distortions I call mental filtering and discounting the positive. You see this all the time when you're feeling inferior and comparing yourself to other people. Mental filter is where you focus on all of your flaws thinking about all of your errors. David Burns: You don't think about what's good about you or what's beautiful about you. I did a TV show finally when the book gained popularity in Cincinnati and it was a morning show and they had a live audience and a band and he was interviewing me. It was exciting for me because it was still the first time I had any media exposure. David Burns: Then after the show, the host said, "Dr. Burns, could I talk to you for a minute?" This often happens to me when I'm on a radio or TV show because the people in the media have tremendous pressures on them and they often also feel that they're not good enough. I said, "Sure. I'd love to. What's the issue?" David Burns: He says, "Well, after every morning show, I get about 350 fan mails, fan letters or calls or whatever." He said, "They are 99.9% positive, but everyday I'll get one critical letter. One critical feedback and I dwell on that one constantly and make myself miserable and ignore all the other positive feedback." That's called mental filter because you filter out the good stuff and you've just focused on your flaws. David Burns: A lot of the people listening to the show right now do that. Then an even bigger mental error is called discounting the positive - when you say that the good things about you don't even count. You may have done this to yourself when someone gives you a compliment, you might tell yourself, "Oh, they're just saying that to be nice to me. They don't really mean it." You discount that positive experience. David Burns: I had a colleague who got upset when he recently won the Nobel prize, one of my college roommates, and the reason he got upset is he said they haven't recognized my best work yet. So those are three of the 10 distortions. Neil Sattin: Yes. One of my favorites I think comes next on your list, at least the list I'm looking at after discounting the positive which is the ways that we jump to conclusions. David Burns: Right. There's two common patterns here, jumping to conclusions that aren't warranted by the facts and mind-reading and fortune-telling are two of the commonest ones. Now, fortune-telling is when you make a prediction about the future, an arbitrary prediction about the future and all anxiety results from fortune-telling, telling yourself that something terrible is about to happen - like when I get on that plane, I just know it will run into turbulence and crash. You feel panic and anxiety. David Burns: Depressed people do fortune-telling as well. Hopelessness results from predicting that things will never change, my problems will never get solved, I'm going to be miserable forever. Almost every depressed patient thinks that way and that's actually why many people with depression commit suicide because they have the illogical belief that their mood will never improve, that they're the one untreatable person. David Burns: Mind-reading is the other common form of jumping to conclusions and this is real common in social anxiety, but Neil, I'm sure you see it in a lot of people with relationship problems. Neil Sattin: Absolutely. David Burns: But mind-reading is where you assume you know how other people are thinking and feeling without any evidence, without any data. I used to struggle with intense social anxiety among my many other fears and phobias that I've had and overcome over the years, but the anxious person - say you're at a social gathering and you think, "Oh, these people won't be interested in what I have to say and they never feel anxious. I'm the only one who feels insecure." David Burns: Then you also may have the thought, "Oh, they can see how anxious I am and they're going to be real turned off by me." Then what happens is that when you start talking to someone, you get really busy worrying about how they're not going to be interested in you. You try to think of something clever or interesting to say while they're talking. David Burns: Then when they're done, instead of repeating what they said and expressing an interest in what they said, you make the little speech you had prepared. That turns the other person off because I think, "Wow, David doesn't seem interested in me. I was just telling him about my son, he was just accepted to Harvard and now he's talking about something else." David Burns: That person pretty quickly loses interest in you and says, "Oh, I have to talk to so and so on the other side of the room." Then you, the shy person get rejected again which is what you thought was going to happen. Although these are distortions, you're thinking in an unrealistic way, they sometimes feel like self-fulfilling prophecies so you don't realize that you're fooling yourself. Neil Sattin: Right, because when you're in it, then you seem to be getting plenty of evidence that it's true. David Burns: Yes, and another form of evidence comes to another distortion. One name I made up called emotional reasoning where you reason from your feelings. You see this in angry interactions, you see that in anxiety and in depression. The depressed patient is giving themselves all these messages like I'm a loser, I'm no good and beating up on yourself and then you feel ashamed and guilty and worthless and inferior and inadequate. David Burns: Then you say, "Well, I feel like a loser, I must really be one." Reasoning from your emotions, thinking your emotions somehow reflect reality. That thought by the way is one we skipped over - overgeneralization. That's number two on the list actually, right after all-or-nothing thinking. David Burns: Overgeneralization, this is a Buddhist thing, really overgeneralization. It's where you generalize to yourself from some specific event. For example, I have a free training for Bay Area psychotherapists every Tuesday evening at Stanford and you don't have to be a Stanford student to come,  I give unlimited free psychotherapy training to therapists who can come to my Tuesday group and any of the listeners or therapists near in the Bay Area on a Tuesday email me and you're welcome to attend my Tuesday training group. David Burns: Then I also have free hikes every Sunday morning and we go out hiking for maybe three and a half hours on the trails around my home and I treat people for free on the hikes. We do training and one of the women on the Sunday hike, I'll keep it vague to protect her identity, but she just had a problem with her boyfriend and they broke up and then she was telling herself, "I'm inadequate ... I'm unlovable" kind of thing. David Burns: "This was my fault and I must have been doing something wrong." You see, when you think like that and most of us do when we're upset, she's generalizing from this event, that it didn't work out with her boyfriend to then this global idea that "I'm inadequate. There's something wrong with me" - as if you had a self that wasn't good enough. David Burns: Then people also say, "I'll be alone forever. I'm unlovable. This is always happening to me." That's all over generalization where you generalize from a negative event and you see it as a never-ending pattern of defeat. You also see it as evidence that you're somehow defective or not good enough than when you're thinking these things, they seem so true - just as believable as the fact that there's skin on your hand. David Burns: You don't realize that you're fooling yourself, the pain that you feel is just incredible. I know that of the many people listening to this show right now, I'm sure you can identify this with this that you've had thoughts like that and you know how real and painful these feelings are. David Burns: It's one of the worst forms of human suffering, but the good news is and we haven't gone around to that, but not only are there fantastic techniques, cognitive therapy techniques that we've been talking about from my book feeling good described in there or my feeling good handbook so that you can overcome these distorted thoughts and get back to joy and self-esteem quickly, but also my group at Stanford over the 10 years, the past 10 years, we've created even more powerful techniques and to help bring about really high speed recovery for people struggling with depression and anxiety. David Burns: The new techniques are way more powerful than the original cognitive therapy although those methods are still fabulous, but maybe we'll have time to talk about some of these. David Burns: But there's more distortions to cover. Neil Sattin: Yeah. Maybe what we could do because I'd love to balance this out and I want to ensure that we cover the other distortions. We have maybe four more. At the same time, maybe let's break from the distortions just to change things up a bit and start entertaining that question of, "Alright, yeah. I relate to some or all that we've even listed so far." Neil Sattin: What are some of the initial steps that someone could talk because where I tend to go with this is like, "Well, these belief patterns like you talked about, "I'm unlovable" as one, those seem to emerge from a place that's immutable. It's something that's really deep in someone's psyche and yet, you're suggesting that there's ways to transform that that are really quick and direct and give someone a felt experience of the truth that's not that thing. David Burns: Yeah, that's right. You can group the techniques into cognitive techniques to crush these distorted thoughts and motivational techniques to get rid of your ... To bring your resistance to change to conscious awareness and melt away the resistance. The patients become incredibly motivated to crush their thoughts. David Burns: An example of the way the cognitive techniques work, what is crucial and this is one of the first things when we first created cognitive therapy in the mid 1970s was to write the negative thoughts on a piece of paper. It's a very humble thing to do, but it can be dramatically effective because then you can look at the list of 10 distortions and immediately, pinpoint the distortions and that makes it much easier to talk back to these disruptive thoughts and poke holes in them. David Burns: I'll give you an example of my own personal life because I've used these techniques myself and if they hadn't worked for me, I never would have become a cognitive therapist and now a TEAM CBT therapist, but when I was a postdoctoral fellow, I used to go to Dr. Beck's weekly seminars and I would present all my most difficult cases and get tips from him on how to treat these people with what was then the rapidly emerging brand new cognitive therapy and it was an exciting time, but one day, I talked to him about a patient that wasn't paying the bill, that I've had a bad session with this patient and asked him for some guidance. David Burns: He actually was pretty critical of the way I had dealt with this patient. I became awfully upset, I got depressed and anxious and I was riding home on the train and my head was filled with negative thoughts and negative feelings. Then when I got home, I told myself, "Well David, you probably better run, go on a long six mile run and get your brain endorphins up so get over your depression" because those were the days when everyone was believing the phony baloney that somehow exercise boosts brain endorphins and will reduce depression. David Burns: I went out on this long run and the longer I ran, the more believable my negative thoughts became. I said, "David, what are you telling yourself?" I said, "Oh, I'm a worthless human being. I have no therapeutic skills, I'm going to be banned from the state of Pennsylvania and they'll take away my medical license, I have no future in psychiatry. I'm a worthless human being, I'm a bad person." Stuff like that. David Burns: It seemed overwhelmingly true. I said, "Are there some distortions in your thoughts David? Look for the distortions like what you tell your patients." I said, "No, there are no distortions in my thoughts. This is just real." I was telling myself it's so weird to hear, you're something like 30 years old or however old I was, 31, it took you all of this time in your life to realize what a horrible loser you are. David Burns: It's as if I had seen the truth for the first time and it was devastating. Then when I got home, I said, "David, why don't you write your thoughts on a piece of paper? That's what you make all of your patients do." I said, "Oh no, no, my thoughts are real, that won't do any good." Then I told myself, "But isn't that the same way you're whining just like your patients whine and resist? And you force them to write their thoughts down on a piece of paper. You tell them they have to do that. Why don't you try that David?" David Burns: I said, "No, no, it wouldn't do any good. I really am a worthless human being. This is true." Then I said, "No David, you're still resisting. Take out a piece of paper and do what you tell your patients to do." I said, "Oh okay, I'll do it just to prove that it won't work." I wrote my thoughts down. Number one, I'm a worthless human being, number two, I have no therapy skill. David Burns: Number three, I screwed up with this patient. Number four, they'll take away my medical license, stuff like that. I wrote down four or five thoughts. Then I said, "Now, are there any distortions?" I looked at my own list of 10 distortions. I said, "Wow, those thoughts are pretty distorted. It's all-or-nothing thinking, black and white thinking like I'm not allowed to make a mistake with a patient. It's overgeneralization, I'm generalizing from the fact that I screwed up with this patient in a session to, "I am a worthless human being," it's fortune-telling, "I have no future in psychiatry." David Burns: Jumping to conclusions, self-blame, hidden "should" statements, that's another distortion. I shouldn't have screwed up, I should always be perfect. It was emotional reasoning, I feel worthless, I must be worthless. I suddenly saw those distortions and then I said, "Now, can I write a positive thought to challenge these negative thoughts?" That's the other part of the exercise. First you write the negative thought, then you identify the distortions, then you write a positive thought. David Burns: The positive thought has to be 100% true. Rationalizations and half truth will never help a human being. I came up with this positive thought. I said, "David, you're just a beginner. You have the right to make mistakes. In fact, even when you're 75 years old years from now, you might be a great therapist, but you'll still make mistakes and learn from them. That's part of the territory." David Burns: "You're absolutely permitted to do that. Instead of beating up on yourself, why don't you talk it over with your patient tomorrow and tell him that you made a mistake and see if you can repair that rupture in your relationship with the patient." All of a sudden, I said, "Is that true?" "Yeah, that thought is 100% true." How much do I believe this rubbish that I'm a worthless human being and all of that and my belief in those negative thoughts went to zero and my negative feelings just disappeared in a flash entirely. I said, "Wow, this shit is pretty good. This really works." Hope you don't have to edit out that word. Neil Sattin: No, that's fine. That's fine. David Burns: Then the next day I saw the patient, I said, "You know Mark, I've been feeling terrible since last session and ashamed because I don't think I treated you right." I was putting pressure on you because of the unpaid balance and I didn't put any emphasis on your suffering and what's going on with you as a human being I just imagine you felt so hurt and angry with me and discouraged and I'm just overjoyed that you came back today rather than dropping out of therapy so we can talk it over and see if we can deepen our relationship. David Burns: He just loved that and we had the best session ever, he gave me perfect empathy scores at the end of the session, but that's just an example from my personal life and I'm sure the people here can relate to that, but I've developed probably 50 or 100 techniques for crushing negative thoughts and I've made it sound easy, but it isn't always easy because you might be very, very trapped in your negative thoughts. David Burns: You might have to try several of the different techniques before you find the one that works for you. I want to be encouraging to the listeners and to therapists who may be listening, but I also don't want to make it sound like something overly simple or overly simplistic because it's really a pretty high-powered, sophisticated type of therapy. David Burns: Fortunately, many people can make it work on their own, but anyway, that's the half of the treatment breakthroughs and that was called the cognitive revolution and my book Feeling Good really helped usher that in when feeling good came out in 1980, cognitive therapy was virtually unknown and they were just a handful of cognitive therapists in the world. David Burns: Now, it's become the most popular form of psychotherapy in the world and the most researched form of psychotherapy in all of the history of psychology and psychiatry. Neil Sattin: I wonder if we could emphasize because I'm thinking about how we talked about the technique for identifying a negative thought, identifying the cognitive distortion or distortions that are happening and just to talk about the importance of actually going through that exercise and writing it down. Neil Sattin: Maybe you could just talk for one more minute about why that part is so important. Why is it important to actually write that stuff down versus to do it in your head? David Burns: I think that the negative, the power of the human mind to be negative is very profound. The negative thoughts are like a snake eating its tail, they go round and round and one leads to the next. David Burns: In the early days, I used to try to do cognitive therapy without the written exercise and to this day, new therapists still try to do that. They think they're too fancy that writing things down is too simplistic or something like that and they're going to be deep and just do verbal, deep stuff with people, but the problem is, the human mind is so clever. David Burns: Each distortion reinforces another one and each negative thought reinforces another one and you go round and round and round. That's why doing it verbally or in your head when you're alone is rarely going to be effective, but when you write the negative thoughts down one at a time and number them with short sentences, that makes it much easier to identify the distortions in them and turn them around. David Burns: There are three rules of thumb. There's an art form to writing them down. Everything is more sophisticated than I make it sound in a brief interview. There's a lot of rules of the game. For example, when you're writing down negative thoughts, you should never put an emotion or an event. David Burns: People have a negative thought like Trisha rejected me and I feel terrible. Well, that's not a negative thought. That's an event. Trisha rejected me and I use a form called the Daily Mood Log and at the top you put the event and then you circle all of your emotions and put how strong they are between zero and a hundred. David Burns: These emotions might be feel guilty, ashamed, lonely, depressed, worthless and then the negative thought would be the interpretation of that event like I must be unlovable, I'll be alone forever. Then those are things that have distortions. A second rule is don't ever put rhetorical questions in the negative thought column. David Burns: If you say something like, "Oh, why am I like this? Why am I so anxious in social situations?" Or "What's wrong with me?" You can't disprove questions so instead you can substitute the hidden claim behind the question which is generally a hidden should statement like I shouldn't be like this or I must be defective because I'm so anxious in social situations or some such thing. David Burns: There are probably one or two other rules of the game and my book When Panic Attacks which is one of my newer books on all the anxiety disorders, Feeling Good is on depression. When Panic Attacks is on all of the different kinds of anxiety. I think the third chapter shows how to fill out the Daily Mood Log and what the rules are to follow to enhance the effectiveness of it so you'll be more likely to have a successful experience. Neil Sattin: Great. The idea is that it's simply by doing this process that the things shift. It's not like there's ... You go through the process and then maybe you would track your mood afterwards and see, "Wow, I'm actually feeling better than I was before" just by simply doing that? David Burns: Well, a lot of people can feel better just by doing it, but the research has shown that two thirds of people just by reading Feeling Good, they can improve a lot in depression, but some people need the help of a therapist and it isn't true that everyone has to do it on your own, sometimes you need another person to get that leverage to pop out of it. David Burns: Another thing that's helpful when you're writing down your negative thoughts is Beck's theory of cognitive specificity. You see, Buddha said our thoughts create our emotions, but Beck took it to the next level and said different patterns of thoughts create different types of emotions. David Burns: If you're feeling guilty, you're probably telling yourself that you're a bad person or that you violated your value system. If you're feeling hopeless, you're definitely telling yourself that things will never change, something like that. I'll be miserable forever. If you're feeling anxious, you're definitely telling yourself something awful is about to happen. David Burns: "When I get on that show with Neil, I'll screw up, my brain will go blank." That type of thing. When you're feeling sad, you're telling yourself... or depressed, that you've lost something central to your self-esteem. When you're feeling angry, you're telling yourself that someone else is a loser that they're treating you unfairly, that they shouldn't be that way. David Burns: These rules can also help individuals pinpoint your negative thoughts. Once you see what the emotions are, then you know the kind of thoughts to look for. One last thing is sometimes people say, "Oh, I don't know what my negative thoughts are." I just say, "We'll just make some up and write them down and number them." David Burns: Then I say, "Are your thoughts like this?" They say, "Oh, that's exactly what I'm thinking." Those are a few tips on refining the part with the negative thoughts. But now we have even more powerful techniques that have evolved in my work with my training and development group at Stanford. Neil Sattin: Yeah, before we talk about those, which I hope we will have time to do - there are a couple of things that jumped out at me. One was as you were describing the distortions that we've already talked about, it popped into my head that this is often at the source of most conflict that happens in couples - that either one person is having distorted thinking or one person is protecting themselves from their own distorted thinking. Neil Sattin: For example, your partner says something and you have this feeling like, "Well, that's not true. I got to defend myself from that accusation." David Burns: That's right yeah. Neil Sattin: You jump into this place of conflict that's all about proving that this negative concept you suddenly are perceiving about yourself isn't true. When that negative concept in and of itself might be an example of you just having a distortion - like for instance, "my partner is mad at me, that must mean they think I'm a horrible human being." David Burns: Yeah, what's huge what you just said, when we're in conflict with people, there's a lot of inner chatter going on in addition to the verbal altercations, the arguing, the escalation, the defensiveness - and some of the distortions will be focused on the other person and some of the distortions will be focused on yourself. David Burns: You see all of the 10 cognitive distortions in relationship conflict, but they have a little bit of a different function I would say. Now, let's say you're angry, Mary is angry at her husband Sam, she's ticked off and then if you look at her thoughts, they have all 10 distortions. David Burns: She'll tell herself things like, she might be thinking, "Oh, he's a loser. All he cares about is himself. The relationship problems are all his fault, he'll never change." That type of thing. You sell all-or-nothing thinking, mind-reading, imagining how he's thinking, you see blame, you see hidden should statements, he shouldn't be like that, he shouldn't feel like that. David Burns: You see discounting the positive, mental filtering, overgeneralization, magnification, minimization. You see all the same 10 distortions. The only difference is that when you're depressed and I can show you that your thoughts about yourself are distorted and that's not true that you're a loser, you're going to love me, the therapist, you're going to appreciate that and you're going to feel better and you're going to feel better and recover from your depression. David Burns: When people are in conflict and we're having distorted thoughts about the other person, we're generally not motivated to challenge those distortions because they make us feel good. We feel morally superior to the other person. I don't generally work with people too much on changing their distortions about others because they don't want to hear it. David Burns: If the therapist finds out that this woman, that her thoughts about her husband are causing her to be upset, not her husband's behavior, and in addition that her thoughts about her husband are all wrong, wrong, wrong, they are all distorted, she'll just fire the therapist and drop out of therapy and she'll have two enemies, her loser of a husband and her loser of a therapist. David Burns: That's why I developed some of the techniques we talked about in the last podcast we did on relationships. I used slightly different strategies, but you're right, those distortions are incredibly positive and the other kind of distortion you have when you're in conflict if someone's criticizing you, again you may start thinking, "This shows that I'm a loser, I'm no good. I should be better than I am. If you're criticizing me, that's a very dangerous and terrible situation." David Burns: By attending to those kind of thoughts that make you feel anxious and ashamed and inferior and guilty and inadequate, then you can modify those and then do much better in the way you communicate with the other person because your ego isn't on the line. An example with me is in my teaching, I always get feedback from every class I do, every student I mentor or supervise from every workshop and I get it right away, I don't get it six months from now, I get it the very day that I'm teaching. David Burns: I get all kinds of criticisms on the feedback forms I've developed even if I have a tremendous teaching seminar, I'll get a lot of criticisms especially if they feel safe to criticize the teacher. I find that if I don't beat myself up with inner dialogue, then I can find the truth in what the student is saying and treat that person with warmth and with respect and with enthusiasm even. David Burns: Then they suddenly really love the way that I've handled their criticism and it leads to a better relationship and that's true between partners or in families as well. That inner dialogue that's where we're targeting ourselves and making ourselves needlessly anxious and defensive and hurt and angry and worthless when we're in conflict with someone - that can be adjusted and modified to really enhance relationships. Neil Sattin: The two distortions that we hadn't really covered yet, you just mentioned them and I thought ... We've mentioned them all at this point, but some of them like blaming, whether it's blaming yourself for a situation or blaming others for a situation, that seems a little self-evident. Neil Sattin: I'm curious if you could talk for a moment about labeling and then also magnification and minimization just because I think those are the two that we listed, but didn't really cover. David Burns: Did we mention shoulds? Neil Sattin: Let's mention them and I think again, that might be something that's a little more understandable for people, but yeah, let's do this. David Burns: Oh yeah, okay. Yup. Well, labeling is just an extreme form of overgeneralization where you say I am a loser or with someone else, "He is a jerk." Where you see yourself or another person as this bad glob so to speak. Instead of focusing on specific behaviors, you're focusing on the self. When you think of yourself as a loser or a hopeless case, it creates tremendous pain. David Burns: When you label someone else as a jerk or a loser, it creates rage and then you'll often treat them in a hostile way and then they treat you in a hostile way and you say, "Oh, I know he was a loser." You don't realize you're involved in a self-fulfilling prophecy and you're creating the other person's, you're contributing to or creating the other person's hostile behavior. David Burns: Magnification or minimization is pretty self-evident - where you're blowing things out of proportion - like procrastinators do that. You think about, "All you have to do, all the filing that you're behind on." It feels like you have to climb Mount Everest and you got overwhelmed and then minimization, you're telling yoruself, "Oh, just working on that for five or 10 minutes would be a drop in the bucket. It wouldn't make a difference." You don't get started on the project. David Burns: We've done those two. The should statement say I think is very subtle and not obvious to people at all that we beat up on ourselves the shoulds and shouldn'ts and oughts and musts and we're saying, "I shouldn't have screwed up, I shouldn't have made that mistake. I should be better than I am."   David Burns: That creates a tremendous amount of suffering and shoulds go back - if you look at the origin in the English dictionary, maybe we did this in our last podcast, I don't recall that if you have one of these thick dictionaries, you'll find the origin of the word should is the Anglo's accent word scolde, S-C-O-L-D-E where you're scolding yourself or another person, where you're saying to your partner, "You shouldn't feel that way." Or, "You shouldn't believe that." David Burns: We see that politically, two people are always blaming someone they're not in agreement with and throwing should statements at them. Albert Ellis has called that the "shouldy" approach to life which is a cheap joke I guess, but it contains a lot of truth. The feminist psychiatrist Karen Horney who actually I think was born in 1890s did beautiful work on shoulds - when my mother, when we moved to Phoenix from Denver, I think my mother got depressed and she read a book by Karen Horney on the Tyranny of the Shoulds, how we give ourselves all these should statements and make us feel like we're not good enough and we're not measuring up to our own expectations and create so much suffering. David Burns: I think that book was very helpful to her and then Albert Ellis in New York saw that, he argued and I think rightly so that most human suffering is the result of the shoulds that we impose on ourselves or the should statements that we impose on others. Neil Sattin: Well, if that's true, then maybe that should be what we take a moment to attack and I'm wondering if you have a powerful crushing technique that works with shoulds whether it's and maybe it would be a little bit different, the ones that we wield against ourselves versus so and so should know or should have done this differently. David Burns: Right. Well, a lot of the overcoming has to do with the mystical, spiritual concept of acceptance, accepting yourself as a flawed human being is really the source of enlightenment, but we fight against acceptance because we think it's like giving in and settling for second best. We continue to beat up on ourselves thinking if we hit ourselves with enough should statements, we'll somehow achieve perfection or greatness or some such thing. David Burns: One thing that I learned from Ellis that has been really helpful to my patients is that there's only three correct uses of the word should in the English language. There's the moral shoulds like the 10 commandments, thou shalt not commit adultery, though shalt not steal or thou shalt not kill. David Burns: There's the laws of the universe should where if I drop a pen right now, it should fall to the earth because of the force of gravity and then there's the legal should. You should not drive down the highway at 90 miles an hour because that's against the law and you'll get a ticket. Now, I had a colleague who came on one of the hikes who has a developmentally challenged child, say a son just to disguise things a little bit and she's from a very high achieving family, Silicon Valley family just to say the least. David Burns: She and her husband are giants, geniuses and then she went to the grammar school for the parent's day and they had all the kids and they have their daughter in some very expensive private school. The kid's pictures were up on the wall and then she saw her son's picture and it was just very primitive compared with the other children who are real high-powered children from high powered families. David Burns: Her son struggles severely and then she saw that and she felt the feeling of shame. Then she told herself, "I should not feel ashamed of my son." That's hitting herself with a should statement which it's like she doesn't have permission to have this emotion and that's what we do to ourselves.   David Burns: That's not a legal should, it's not illegal to feel ashamed of yourself or your son. She then was also of course feeling ashamed of herself. It's not immoral and it doesn't violate the laws of the universe. A simple technique that Ellis suggested and it's so simple it goes in one ear and out the other instead of saying, "I shouldn't, you can just say it would be preferabe if or I would prefer it if or it would be better if." David Burns: You could say it it would be better, it would be preferable if I didn't feel ashamed of my son, but that's the human feeling and probably other parents feel upset with their children, they feel ashamed sometimes of their kids or angry with their kids. It's giving yourself permission to be human and that's called the acceptance paradox. David Burns: The paradox is sometimes when you accept your broken nature, accept your flaws and shortcomings, you transcend them. I've often written that acceptance is the greatest change a human being can make, but it's elusive and Buddha tried to teach this 2,500 years ago when I saw on TV and I don't know if was just a goofy program, but it was on PBS that he had over 100,000 followers in his lifetime and only three achieved enlightenment. David Burns: I think it was frustrating to him and disappointing, but I can see it clearly because what he was teaching was so simple and basic and yet it's hard for us to grasp it and that's why I love doing therapy because we've got powerful new techniques now where I can bring my patients to enlightenment often in a single therapy session if I have more than an hour. David Burns: If I have a two hour session, I can usually complete treatment in about a session and see the patient going from all the self-criticism and self-hatred and misery to actually joy and euphoria. It's one of the greatest experiences a human being can have because when my patient has a transforming experience, then it transforms me at the same time. Neil Sattin: Can you give us a taste of what some of the more powerful new techniques are and how they might work in these circumstances? David Burns: Yeah, they're pretty anti-intuitive and it took me many years of clinical practice before I figured it out and before it dawned on me. I would say very few therapists know how to do this and it's absolutely against the grain of the way therapists have been trained and the general public have been trained to think about depression and anxiety as brain disorders. David Burns: The DSM calls them mental disorders. We've gone in the opposite direction and I'll just make it real quick because we're getting long on people's time here I'm afraid, but when I am working with a person, like last night at my Tuesday group, we were working with a therapist and someone who's in training to become a therapist and she was being very self-critical and telling herself she wasn't smart enough and just beating up on herself and saying that she was defective and she should be better at this and she should this, she shouldn't that. David Burns: She was feeling like 90% depressed and 80% ashamed and intensely anxious. One thing I do before I ... She had all these negative thoughts, "I'm defective" and I don't have the list in my hand, but she had about 17 very self-critical thoughts. After I empathized and my co-therapist was Jill Levitt, a clinical psychologist who I teach with at Stanford and Jill is just a gem, she's fantastically brilliant and kind and compassionate and humble. David Burns: After we empathized with this individual and I'll just keep it vague because most therapists feel exactly the same way so I won't give any identifying details, but we asked this young woman, "Would you like some help today?" With her depression and anxiety. If we had a magic button on the table and she pressed it, all our negative thoughts and feelings would instantly disappear. David Burns: Would she press the magic button? She said, "Oh yeah, that would be wonderful." I guess she's felt this way on and off throughout her life since she was a little girl that she is somehow not good enough. Then we said, "Well, we have no magic button, but we have amazing techniques." But before we use these techniques, maybe we should ask, "What are your negative thoughts and feelings show about you that's beautiful and awesome?" David Burns: Also, "what are some benefits to you in having all of these negative thoughts and feelings?" She was very puzzled by that at first as most therapists are like, "How could there be benefits from having depression? We learn that's some kind of mental disorder or major depressive disorder, dysthymic disorder, all these fancy names pretending that these are mental illnesses of some kind. David Burns: But then she got in the flow, we primed the pump a little bit and she was able to come up with a list of 20 overwhelming benefits to her and beautiful things about her that were revealed by her negative thoughts and feelings. For example, when she says, "I'm defective." She will say, "Well, it shows that I'm honest and accountable. Because I do have many flaws." David Burns: Then a second benefit was "it shows that I have high standards." I was able to say, "Do you have high standards?" She said, "Absolutely." I said, "Have your high standards motivated you to work hard and accomplish a lot?" She says, "Oh yeah, absolutely." That was the third benefit. Then the fourth benefit is her self-criticism showed that she's a humble person. That was the fourth benefit, the fourth beautiful thing it showed about her. David Burns: Then we pointed out that humility is the same as spirituality. Her self-criticism shows that she's a humble and spiritual person and then her sadness showed her passion for what she hopes to achieve which is a role as a therapist and a good therapist and her self-doubt keeps her on her toes and motivates her to work really hard. David Burns: Her suffering shows enhances her compassion for others and her shame shows that she has a good value system, a good moral compass and on and on and on, then we came up with a list of when we got to 20 benefits of her negative thoughts and feelings, then we simply said to her, "Well, maybe we don't want to press that magic button because when your negative thoughts and feelings disappears, then these other good things will disappear as well. Why in the world would you want to do that?" David Burns: We have become the role of her subconscious mind and the therapist is paradoxically arguing for the status quo and not arguing for change. The therapist's attempt to help or change the patient is actually the cause of nearly all therapeutic failur

Guest: Marianne H. Eckardt, M.D. Psychiatrist and Psychoanalyst Daughter of Karen Horney, pioneer psychoanalyst President of American Academy of Psychoanalysis and Dynamic Psychiatry 1972-1973 Dr. Eckardt discusses growing up in Berlin and her psychoanalysis by Melanie Klein when she was 10 years old as well as the founding of the American Academy of Psychoanalysis and Dynamic Psychiatry in 1955. Dr, Eckardt was 100 years old at time of the interview on November 19, 2013 and currently resides in Barrington, Rhode Island.   

Susan Rudnick's comments about the sexual abuse of women by powerful men derive from Karen Horney's formulation of the Real Self, as she articulated it in Neurosis and Human Growth. Even if we are severely alienated from that Real Self, it is still there, and we do continue to have human need for authentic connection to ourselves […]

Susan Rudnick’s comments about the sexual abuse of women by powerful men derive from Karen Horney’s formulation of the Real Self, as she articulated it in Neurosis and Human Growth. Even if we are severely alienated from that Real Self, it is still there, and we do continue to have human need for authentic connection to ourselves […]

This week we talk about science education, people who are doing great, and people who are getting messy. Then we read about Dr. Karen Horney, an amazing feminist psychoanalyst who went against Freud to develop her own theories on therapy, anxiety, and society. Next, we interview (for the second time) Dr. Dana Cotto, a wonderful learning scientist who works with math and science learning. Finally we talk about Moms Who Code, read some awesome tweets, and talk about Atomic by Design! Thanks for listening! Don't forget to donate to our kickstarter (if you want): https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/956706778/superwomen-in-science-podcast http://fieldworkfail.com/ https://twitter.com/JennMacBrown Dr. Dana Cotto http://www.danamillercotto.com/ https://twitter.com/danacotto Moms Can Code https://www.momscancode.com/ Atomic by Design! https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/840827025/atomic-by-design-a-fashion-line-tribe-for-curious

Episode 6 explores the intrapsychic domain. In this topic, we will explore Freud's original ideas of psychoanalytic theory, together with some other branches of ideas in the intrapsychic domain from Carl Jung, Alfred Adler, Karen Horney, Harry Stack Sullivan, Erich Fromm, Erik Erikson and Henry Murray.

This essay attempts to explain why so many people think the Shroud of Turin is authentic.

Ask Stefanie  Kids with ADHD act without thinking, are hyperactive, and have trouble focusing. They may understand what's expected of them but have trouble following through because they can't sit still, pay attention, or attend to details.  Ask Stefanie interviews Stephanie Weldon to find out what parents and teachers can do to maximize children's potential both academically and socially. Stephanie Weldon has the combination of being a learning specialist and psychotherapist. She grew up having ADHD herself, so she really relates to her patients. Understanding first-hand the way children with ADHD learn is very important in the process of getting them to reach their highest potential. Through organizational tips and techniques, learning support, and therapy, children with ADHD can and should succeed.   Stephanie Weldon is a psychotherapist who began her training in the trauma division of the Karen Horney clinic working with adults. In addition, Stephanie is the former director of GO Families where she spent several years facilitating weekly support groups for parents who have children with learning disabilities and other special needs. Stephanie has been consulting for the public and  independent schools in NYC for over ten years. She is the former learning specialist for the Chapin School.  Most recently, in celebration of IDEA's 35th year anniversary, a documentary called People Like Me was released tracking the theater company Stephanie founded twenty years ago when she first began working with children with special needs.