i am so interested in the metaphors used for the psychotherapy of BPD disorder:
emotional dance, re weaning a child securely... and such kinds of metaphors.
here is a self created chance for compeleting my unfinished childhood.however,I HOPE IT NEVER GET FINISHED
i am so interested in the metaphors used for the psychotherapy of BPD disorder:
emotional dance, re weaning a child securely... and such kinds of metaphors.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Dec 13, 2010, No Pagination Specified. doi: 10.1037/a0021714
Perceived closeness that preserves the distinctness of each partner enhances intimate relationship quality, whereas pseudocloseness or enmeshment—reflecting an inability to distinguish one's own thoughts and emotions from a partner's—may have more negative outcomes (R. J. Green & P. D. Werner, 1996). Two studies investigated whether a dispositional inability to differentiate self from other is manifested at the attentional level as reduced capacity to inhibit following the gaze of another (A. Frischen, A. P. Bayliss, & S. P. Tipper, 2007). Among healthy elderly spouses in Study 1, superior gaze control predicted superior sociocognitive functioning, and those with poorer gaze control abilities were perceived by the partner as constricting the perceiving partner's autonomy, which in turn predicted lower relationship satisfaction among the latter. Moreover, these links were mediated by enmeshment, as indicated by the percentage of “we”-focused versus “I”- or partner-focused thoughts and emotions in the partners' independent accounts of the same relationship events. Extending these findings in a sample of Parkinson's disease patients and their spouses, Study 2 revealed a biphasic effect of self–other differentiation on relationship dynamics: In the early stages of the disease, increased couple focus promoted superior relationship quality, whereas lack of self–other differentiation predicted poorer relationship quality later. Thus, dispositional variations in fundamental social-perceptual processes predict both close relationship dynamics and long-term relationship quality. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)
Theorem. A cat has nine tails.
Proof. No cat has eight tails. Since one cat has one more tail than no cat, it must have nine tails.
Q: How can you tell that a mathematician is extroverted?
A: When talking to you, he looks at your shoes instead of at his.
A woman in a bar tries to pick up a mathematician.
"How old, do you think, am I?" she asks coyly.
"Well - 18 by that fire in your eyes, 19 by that glow on your cheeks, 20 by that radiance of your face, and adding that up is something you can probably do for yourself..."
Q: What is the difference between a Ph.D. in mathematics and a large pizza?
A: A large pizza can feed a family of four...
Q: What is sour, yellow, and equivalent to the axiom of choice...
A: Zorn's lemon...
Q: What is polite and works for the phone company?
A: A deferential operator...
Q: What is purple and commutative?
A: An abelian grape...
ownership...thats it! what i am struggling with these days.
nothing belongs to you in this big big world. remember it! and everything will be okay
Siren of the police cars
He knows himself as a mere academic person with scientific concerns ! he never attends in political conflicts…he pays no attention to social and political discussions…he believes these r just some kind of rabish. Last night , while crossing ther road he hears the sound of siren police cars for protecting the charectors….he just sits there…on the pavement an cries for half an hour!...who Is he actually? A simple unknown researcher or a recently born revolutionist?
Try this: some time this week contrast and compare craving-driven eating and hunger-driven eating.On a scheduled craving-driven eating day, eat each and every time you have a craving.On a scheduled hunger-driven eating day, eat only if you are hungry.
Notice a process of social and environmental synchronization.When you eat in a craving-driven fashion, you eat each and every time the environment presents you with a powerful enough stimulus to elicit a craving in you.As a result, you become attuned to the environment, eating in sync, as if line-dancing with a crowd of strangers.Everybody eats, and you eat.
Compare this with a different kind of synchronization, self-synchronization (synchronization with your self), when you eat in a hunger-driven manner.While you begin to feel progressively out of sync with the environment (everybody eats, but you don’t), you begin to appreciate a sense of your behavior becoming synchronized with your intentions.Notice what feels better to you.
Don’t get me wrong:I am not suggesting that you forever eat all by yourself. No. I am just pointing out the cost associated with social eating.Social eatingconnects us to others and disconnects us from ourselves. That’s just the reality of it. After all, while we can sync our watches, we can’t quite sync our hunger. As a result, at least one person at the table will be eating out of sync with themselves. On some days it might feel more important for you to connect with others than with yourself. On those days, eating while not hungry (just because someone else has triggered you to crave) might be an acceptable price to pay for the psychological benefits of social company. On other days, perhaps, not. Knowing what you need more (to connect with yourself or with others) when you need it is part of balanced self-care.
copyright/pavel somov, ph.d.
Bobby McFerrin may have been wrong when he sang, "Don't worry, be happy." A new study shows that people who tackle heavy topics in daily conversation actually report higher levels of happiness than those who keep it light.
University of Arizona researcher Mathias R. Mehl had 79 undergraduates wear an Electronically Activated Recorder, or EAR, for three days. The EAR recorded 30 seconds of sound every 12.5 minutes. Researchers coded snippets of conversations picked up by the recorders according to whether the participant was alone or with others and whether the conversation was small talk, substantive, or other. Overall, about 18 percent of conversations qualified as small talk while 35.5 percent were substantive.
Twice in a three week interval participants also completed an inventory on how satisfied they were with their lives and were asked to assess the statement "I see myself as someone who is happy, satisfied with life."
One result from the study showed what previous studies have also shown: People who spent more time with others were happier. However the study also revealed that those who spent less time engaging in small talk and more time talking about substantial issues also experienced higher levels of well-being. Compared to the least happiest participants, the happiest in the study spent 25 percent less time alone and 70 percent more time talking, engaging in twice as much substantive talking and about one third the amount of small talk.
Whether there is a cause and effect relationship between talking about heavy topics and being happy remains to be seen. People who talk about more substantial things may, for example, be happier due to already existing intimacies in their lives. Next up, Dr. Mehl plans to investigate whether prescribing these sorts of conversations leads to an increase in well-being.
In the meantime you may want to dig a little deeper before your next conversation turns to the weather forecast.
اما ظاهرا پارادكس غريبي اينجا وجود داره كه آقاي گردر از توضيح دربارش غافل موندن! اگر ما واقعا معتقديم شگفتي و بديع بودن ويژگي ذاتي دنياست و هيچ چيز از پيش تعيين شده ايي وجود نداره كه بخواييم منتظرش باشيم و همه چيز غير قابل پيش بيني است، اونوقت به نظر ميرسه اون كسي كه بيشتر از همه شگفت زده مي شه در واقع كسي خواهد بود كه كمتر از همه به نو ديدن عادت كرده!