Can I get some insights about psychodynamics, /ssh/?
While it doesn't make for very good therapy, the submerged part of the iceberg, however inarticulate, is as vast as the analogy suggests, containing all the precursors of our intuitive thought, all our preferences, our fears, our potential reactions, the tangled web of a universe inside all of our minds, and obviously, everything about us we do not articulate in our minds' eyes, and thereby, everything we ever did think of and forget. It's the most chaotic, dynamic, and relevant thing we have left to learn about, of which we have done almost none. Theories and models do not take away from the relevance of this concept, but rather highlight the fact that there is a virtual infinity of understanding left to accomplish about our own minds. It's the meaning behind everything that we are, for fuck's sake.
|
>>
|
|
|
>>80658
Your post is really more about behaviorism than what I was talking about, but there are issues to discuss in it relating to psychodynamics, and you did tie it in with your last paragraph.
Really, I think of behavior more often as it pertains to psychopharmacology (mostly neurotransmitters, don't know much about structure yet). Every individual exhibits deviance. I like how you said, "the neurodiversity of our species," and I think of it more as the quirks every individual exhibits neurologically, the "intelligence", thought patterns, and "personality". I like psychodynamics because to me, it shows how obscure these things really are, because they must be evaluated on an individual basis to really get the whole picture, and all of the theorists before have been theorists, schemers, because you can only look at the mind in this way so vaguely unless you want try understand one snapshot of a person for your entire life. They try to simplify what is inherently complicated. I don't believe there is a simple answer to nature versus nurture at all, and this approaches the problem as a gargantuan, expressionist mural painted over the instinct and other innate ~physical specifics of the individual. It's draining to think about how different everyone really is, to me, not that they aren't all similar and predictable as well.
I do think perhaps the majority of people have a degree of...marked defectiveness of personality and thought, which couldn't necessarily be called disorders, because they don't always ruin their quality of life, but do make them more simple though not less capable of intelligence. Things similar to Asperger's, but less prominent. If you think I'm saying I think everyone's stupid, try to read this paragraph again foregoing that conclusion, and I'm sorry I can't be more specific.
|
|
