Schizoids

[Lorikeet (Satyr)]

There’s a theme here. A pattern that permeates the Americano-sphere of dominion, infecting its members.
A schism that is evident in ILP members who mirror this psychosomatic state of disillusionment and separation, because most are products of America’s culture-of-no-culture, messianic, crypto-Abrahamic ideologies.
I identify it as nihilism - nullifying the threat so as to preserve the ego - lucid part of consciousness.
A kind of selective skepticism employing a variety of feminine methods - linguistic in nature - to cast a shade of doubt over what they’ve been traumatized by, viz., requiring little to no evidence where there is no threat, but then demanding supernatural levels of proof to refrain from dismissing what the mind evaluates as a severe to its welfare threat.

Such levels of psychic fragility must be ascribed to generations of western sheltering, producing spirits that seem unable to cope with anything real that exceeds their comfort levels - determined by their inherited constitutions and how this has been cultivated or allowed to atrophy under the protective umbrella of modern socioeconomic and ideologies.

It is a form of mind/body dissonance, where body acquires the physical, tangible identity of the ‘evil’ antagonist to the mind’s intangible, metaphysical, ‘innocent goodness.’
A psychosomatic and moral dilemma resolved by siding with what offers more options.

---

We see this in Ecmandu’s “solution” to a personal; trauma, converting the ‘injustices of natural selection’, which he resolves by inventing a fantastic muti-verse - a fractured universe, reflecting his fractured psyche.
A multi-verse that offers everyone a private reality of their own.
This he considers a revolutionary solution to the ‘hard problem’ of consent violations - mainly the violation of his non-consent to being excluded from the gene-pool or from the path to happiness.

---

We see it in the woman who openly admits to being ‘fractured and fragmented’, due to a moral dilemma, rendering her helpless to pass judgement and make a choice.
In response she declares free-pwill to be illusory and choice to be a non-existent.
her ‘moral dilemma’ is really a personal quest to not make another unhappy, so as to not be her self made unhappy.
Judging and choosing excludes and causes pain in those it efects…a dilemma for her feminine sensitivities that cannot bring herself to objectively pass judgement because she can sympathize with both sides, and both sides have an emotional argument to make.
Her selflessness is really concealing selfishness. Her reluctance to pass judgement - based on objective merits rather than subjective emotions - might be a inherited deficiency or it may be a undisclosed desire to not be judged, in return, using harsh unemotional objective reasoning.

Her resolution adopts the ‘fractured and fragmented’ indecisiveness, as an ideal all must emulate fi they want to prove their humanity.
Ironically, it seeps into her moral judgments deciding that amorality - negation of all collective interests for the sake of the individual’s emotional well-being - is the ‘moral’ higher ground.
Her Americanism’s individualism is evident in her psychosis, choosing the emotional welfare of individuals rather than the collective welfare.
Similar to Ecmandu’s resolution, she finds a resolution in fragmentation, rejecting the physical, tangible, where this is impossible, preferring the mind’s ability to turn inward - away from a threatening world - to immerse herself in ambiguity with no physical tangible costs.
Amorality is supposed to deal with the feelings of shame, since shamelessness is a necessary prerequisite for this level of self-deceit. Shame associated with collective judgement. An individual is ‘liberated’ from their moral standards, evolved to preserve social systems from fracturing and fragmenting - as the US is currently experiencing.
Shamelessness means to be void of collective concerns. Acting according to your subjective impulses and whims, with no care about their impact on society.
Anarchies cynical narcissistic parasitism is rejected and replaced by a collectivization of narcissism, finding protection from any reality-checks in the intervening power of the collective - a power gradually declining due to the effects of this schizoid psychosis.

---

We see this schizophrenia in Transexuality, the current American dilemma, which is produced by following tis undermining ‘emotionally founded logic.’
Individuals born and raised in America’s alienating world-view, where all is made into a product or a service on the marketplace, is troubled by the realization that America’s individualism and Capitalism, - its pursuit of happiness - does not lead to happiness for all, but to the few.
A Marxist awakening occurs, and it finds in Marxism - secular Abrahamism - a resolution and a target to accuse and hate.
In Postmodernism this hated Capitalist is replaced by the heterosexual European male.

The traumatized individual - usually male, as the primary expendable sex - finds resolution in Americanism’s individualism and the myth of the self-made man.
He finds hope in monetary messianism that can purchase and compensate for an impoverished inheritance. With money an individual can buy a new and improved identity, and force all to play along with the farce. Money = Messiah, saviuor…reborn as intangible noetic spirit, as word, code…as numerical value.
He can now remake himself according to fashion trends, which are distinctly feminine - feminine being the ideal sex for a multiethnic, multiracial, culture-of-no-culture, techno-utopian system.
Being rejected by the feminine the male decides to join it and become a female himself, necessitating a linguistic schism between mind - primarily the ego ([size=80]lucid part of self[/size]) - and the body, the physical, the tangible, the apparent.
Mind becomes the healing, corrective divine power that can heal the body…or negate its importance.
Nihilistic inversion - the body is the illusion, and the mind is where the real reality can be found - a reality that is subjective and entirely malleable.
Intersubjectivity is the Golden Rule imposing the moral duty to support others in their private universe so as to be supported by them, in return.

---

Americanism is at the root of this schism.
Americanism individualism; its rejection of all earthly authorities - including the government; its rejection of all collective identities - including biological; its worship of money as the true saviour from nature’s authoritarianism; its myth that all can be purchased on the open markets - including love, happiness and an alternate identity; Americanism rejection of all traditions, all spiritual dogmas, all cultures, adopting a culture-of-no-culture as its all-incusive system; its rejection of all borders, tangible or intangible limits to the mind’s subjective fantasies.

[Lorikeet (Satyr)]

To the list of Schizoids we can add Abrahamism as the original foundation of modernity’s subsequent alienations from the physical.

Here mind becomes a cosmic entity and body the ‘fallen’ state, its shadow, separated from the cosmic mind for no apparent reason, since this all-knowing mind is described as omniscient - all-knowing - so there is no reason for any of this trickery of illusory multiplicities.
Free-will enters the picture to resolve the dilemma that alludes to a masochistic cosmic mind or a cosmic mind that is not all-knowing.
Humans are cast in the role of evil doers, who dares exercise a will given to them by a creator, knowing they would do so.
Punished, for doing what it was inevitable, according to this delusion.

This cosmic mind wants to know itself, via its creations?
If so, it is not all-knowing - omniscient, and not perfect.
If so, is it bored?
Again, a contradiction of its perfection.

Circularity and obscurantism attempts to conceal the inherent contradictions in this self-deceiving schism.
Compartmentalization is also a method of dealing with trauma.
Standards shift from everyday to existential - two contrary ideas existing simultaneously in the same mind that must keep them separated.
Cohesion is anthema…a recipe for total collapse.
The mind needs both to deal with its awakening awareness, so it fractures and fragments - sanity insanity coexisting; reason and unreason respectfully apply.

[Meno2 (Meno_)]

Lorikeet says:

“The mind needs both to deal with its awakening awareness, so it fractures and fragments - sanity insanity coexisting; reason and unreason respectfully apply.”

meno says:

“Although binary systems have been linked, ‘entangled’ throughout history, the attack of religiosity repressed and projected as a way to avoid any objective proof against it, one way or another, has been a recurrent method of refocusing the issue to levels that are east to dismiss as irrelevant.

The compartmentalization which accompanies incessant review, as a matter of course, truly breaks up the structural integrity which has objectified and solidified the sense by which reasoning has given it’s credibility , but the compartmention has not dealt a fatal blow to a premordiallly hidden objective, that a repression of religious fervor seems to indicate.

With loss of a reasonable assesment as to the validity of the ontogenesis of supernatural belief, the ideal of a projective objective to religious supression can not make sense in a vacuum of destructured entanglements of cohesive senses of belief one way or another.

The faith in it’s self or the other, as a confliction of hidden premordial objects within individual psyches of man, can not rise to a level where such conflicts could rise to a level, where the physical and metaphysical representations could not conceivably correspond to a sensible and rational level, without requiring an innate capacity to form intended revisions to fit changing and changeable variable belief systems.

That both kinds of systems need to condone associations that confirm to and confirm current models, need not question weather such were intended or happened because of internal effective changes within their interaction, rather than effects of eureka moments as results of meditative non casual intra subjective processes .

Both it either could process the constructive nature of integration, considering both societal and personal experiences.

Which reminds me of a psych 101 instructor suggesting to those going along with the idea that there is a center to the personality, that one really knows if the associations that overlap make sense or not. That structural integrity if it is affirmative, need not cause much trouble in the shadowy appearance that the the formo of it might make.
“

[Lorikeet (Satyr)]

@McGilchrist

I believe Jaynes was near to making a breakthrough – did in fact make one – but that, perhaps derailed by the view of schizophrenia outlined above, his conclusion was diametrically opposed to the one he should have drawn. His insight that there was a connection between the voices of the gods and changes in the mental world of those who heard them, that this might have something to do with the brain, and indeed that it concerned the relationship between the hemispheres, remains, in my view, fundamentally correct. However, I believe he got one important aspect of the story back to front. His contention that the phenomena he describes came about because of a breakdown of the ‘bicameral’ mind – so that the two hemispheres, previously separate, now merged – is the precise inverse of what happened. The phenomena came about because of a relative separation of the two chambers, the two hemispheres. Phenomena that were previously uncomplicatedly experienced as part of a relatively unified consciousness now became alien. Intuitions, no longer acted on unselfconsciously, no longer ‘transparent,’ no longer simply subsumed into action without the necessity of deliberation, became objects of consciousness, brought into the plane of attention, opaque, objectified. Where there had been previously no question of whether the workings of the mind were ‘mine’, since the question would have had no meaning – there being no cut off between the mind and the world around, no possibility of standing back from one’s own thought processes to ascribe them to oneself or anyone or anything else – there was now a degree of detachment which enabled the question to arise, and led to the intuitive, less explicit, thought processes being objectified as voices (as they are in schizophrenia), viewed as coming from ‘somewhere else.’ This interpretation, moreover, has the advantage that it fits with what we know about the tendency in schizophrenia to bring into conscious awareness processes normally left unconscious and intuitive.
[size=80][The Master and His Emissary – The Divided Brain and the Making of the Western World][/size]

My own positions on the subject act as a bridge between Jaynes and McGilchrist. A gradual development of the frontal lobes strengthened the communication and synthesis between the left/right hemispheres, experienced as an awakening of mind to itself, i.e., brain to body. The experience of what we now call ‘conscience’ must have been disconcerting because it increased the sources of suffering and anxiety in individuals that now began to perceive themselves objectively, i.e., increasingly becoming aware of self in relation to other from a third-person perspective – something animals, and less sophisticated consciousness,’ are not burdened by. We can only assume that this process began in intellectually superior individuals within tribal hierarchies, which were then given a privileged status, being the ones that could communicate with spirits and the souls of the dead, or were feared as being possessed by mysterious entities – shamans, gradually developing into the priestly class.
So far I am in agreement with Jaynes, but he stopped there and did not develop his idea further, lending credence to McGilchrist’s critique.
The process of awakening to oneself, increasing the sources of anxiety/suffering, must have triggered an organisms’ defensiveness, because the brain’s primary utility is to promote the survival and growth of the individual organism.
I believe a defensive mechanism of fight/flight may have been expressed as the antagonism between men and gods, but that both strategies could not find a resolution, as brain, from where mind emerges, can’t detach from body, nor can the left-hemisphere disconnect from the right without severe consequences. Nature, once more, found an ingenious solution, directing us to McGilchrist’s analysis as the most probable resolution, i.e., a selective and partial disconnection of left/right hemispheres – not organically but linguistically, via mental abstractions acting as defensive chasms of distancing, creating two distinct compartmentalisations in the left/hemisphere which brings us to Orwell’s newspeak as the final outcome.
Schizophrenia, as McGilchrist noted in his rejection of Jaynes, is a modern phenomenon, because it is in modern man that nihilism has found a socioeconomic utility; a school of thought that provides different kinds of noetic fissures to distance mind from body.
My positions on nihilism, in particular, state that it is through cognitive defensiveness, using semiotics (language) to create ideological walls of code, and/or noetic chasms, intending to protect mind from the physical it emerges from, or in McGilchrist’s contexts, the left from the right hemisphere establishing their unique world-views where the ideological input of the left-hemisphere usurps the right-hemisphere’s vague, but disturbing, honesty.
Both Jaynes and McGilchrist can be synthesized through nihilism into one cohesive model.

@McGilchrist

Putting it at its simplest, where Jaynes interprets the voices of the gods as being due to the disconcerting effects of the opening of a door between the hemispheres, so that the voices could for the first time be heard, I see them as being due to the closing of the door, so that the voices of intuition now appear distant, ‘other’; familiar but alien, wise but uncanny – in a word, divine.
My thesis is that the separation of the hemispheres brought with it both advantages and
disadvantages. It made possible a standing outside of the ‘natural’ frame of reference, the common-sense everyday way in which we see the world. In doing so it enabled us to build on that ‘necessary distance’ from the world and from ourselves, achieved originally by the frontal lobes, and gave us insight into things that otherwise we could not have seen, even making it possible for us to form deeper empathic connections with one another and with the world at large. The best example of this is the fascinating rise of drama in the Greek world, in which the thoughts and feelings of our selves and of others are apparently objectified, and yet returned to us as our own. A special sort of seeing arises, in which both distance and empathy are crucial. But the separation also sowed the seeds of left-hemisphere isolationism, allowing the left hemisphere to work unchecked. At this stage in cultural history, the two hemispheres were still working largely together, and so the benefits outweighed by a long way the disadvantages, but the disadvantages became more apparent over time.
[size=80][The Master and His Emissary – The Divided Brain and the Making of the Western World][/size]

Frontal lobes bridged right/left hemisphere connectivity “opening the doors” of cognition, but then the doors are closed and locked allowing only partial and selective connectivity – the left/hemisphere, reacting defensively, creates cognitive pockets manipulating semiotics so as to protect itself, and the organism, from the right/hemisphere’s impact and corrections to the left-hemispheres absolute certainties. A self-imposed incoherence produced Orwellian political linguistics that allowed two contrary world-views and political jargon to coexist simultaneously within the same brain, i.e., multiple minds emerging from one brain; a form of self-induced madness, and/or schizophrenia that was the product of ideals conflicting with the real, finding a solution where they could coexist.
As I’ve said, nihilism is an inversion of the relationship between ideal & real – a semiotic overturning. We see this clearly in how the connection between left/right hemispheres can be selectively inverted converting McGilchrist’s “emissary” into an ‘authoritarian master,’ and the “master” to be ignored by its own “emissary,” or to be subjugated into its slave; a metaphorical disconnection of mind from body, where body is demoted to an inconsequential and subordinate status, or completely dismissed, along with all corporeality and tangible reality.

@McGilchrist

Let me briefly recap. In cases where the right hemisphere is damaged, we see a range of clinically similar problems to those found in schizophrenia. In either group, subjects find it difficult to understand context, and therefore have problems with pragmatics, and with appreciating the ‘discourse elements’ of communication. They have similar problems in understanding tone, interpreting facial expressions, expressing and interpreting emotion, and understanding the presuppositions that lie behind another’s point of view. They have similar problems with Gestalt perception and the understanding and grasping of wholes. They have similar problems with intuitive processing, and similar deficits in understanding metaphor. Both exhibit problems with appreciating narrative, and both tend to lose a sense of the natural flow of time, which becomes substituted by a succession of moments of stasis. Both report experiencing the related Zeitraffer phenomenon in visual perception (something that can sometimes be seen represented in the art works of schizophrenic subjects). Both appear to have a deficient sense of the reality or substantiality of experience (‘it’s all play-acting’), as well as of the uniqueness of an event, object or person. Perhaps most significantly they have a similar lack of what might be called common sense. In both there is a loss of the stabilising, coherence-giving, framework-building role that the right hemisphere fulfils in normal individuals. Both exhibit a reduction in pre-attentive processing and an increase in narrowly focussed attention, which is particularistic, over-intellectualising and inappropriately deliberate in approach. Both rely on piecemeal decontextualised analysis, rather than on an intuitive, spontaneous or global mode of apprehension. Both tend to schematise – for example, to scrutinise the behaviour of others, rather as a visitor from another culture might, to discover the ‘rules’ which explain their behaviour. The living become machine-like: as if to confirm the primacy of the left hemisphere’s view of the world, one schizophrenic patient described by Sass reported that ‘the world consists of tools, and … everything that we glance at has some utilization.’ From neuroimaging, too, there is evidence that schizophrenics show abnormal patterns of brain activation, often showing excessive left-hemisphere activation in situations where one would expect more activation of the right hemisphere.
This goes across a whole range of activities: for example, even the sense of smell appears to be abnormally lateralised. There is a decrease in expected right-hemisphere activation in limbic connections to the rhinencephalon (smell brain) and right orbitofrontal cortex, and an increase in left hemisphere activity during olfaction. When one considers how critical the sense of smell is for infant–mother bonding, and social bonding of all kinds, and the part it plays in grounding our world in intuition and the body, one appreciates that, tiny as this piece of the jigsaw may be, it is not insignificant. The right hemisphere is not functioning normally, and the left hemisphere takes its place. And, as it happens, drugs that help stabilise schizophrenia act to reduce dopaminergic activity, a form of neurotransmission on which the left hemisphere is dependent to a greater extent than the right.
[size=80][The Master and His Emissary – The Divided Brain and the Making of the Western World][/size]

Mind/Body dissonance, a.k.a. alienation, is a left/right hemisphere dissonance, where the ‘left’ usurps the authority of the ‘right’ – mirroring political discourse.
A fact that ought not to surprise us because politics, like all techniques & technologies, are externalizations of organic processes. [size=50] [ MANifesto: Right<>Left][/size]
Politics mirroring biological processes, expressed distinctly as a masculine/feminine demeanour.

[Lorikeet (Satyr)]

Linguistic Lenses
An organism relates to world (environment) through its senses. This æsthetic relationship produces reactions. Genes, through the senses, establish and maintain this fragile relationship with world/reality, through which an individual continuously evaluates its own place and its quality.
Memes establish a mediating lens that adjusts, and sometimes corrupts, this relationship, and along with it the individual’s sense of place and of presence – meme modifies relationships, multiplying or dividing them in accordance with its own ideals/motives. The meme also acts as a point of self-referential validation, oftentimes intentionally circumventing sensory input – an individual can orient itself and judge itself by completely ignoring sense data; memes converting lenses to mirrors, with varying degrees of opaqueness.
We recall that to create a mirror you must darken the side facing away, creating a reflective surface that also inverts the reflected image. The meme acts in the same way when it is nihilistic. The degree of its nihilism measures the degree of its opaqueness – the extreme being a total darkening of the back-side of the conceptual lens (solipsism) – the one facing outward – leaving one side reflecting inward, so that the mind perceives itself as reflected back inverted.
Language is the lens intervening between subject & object. It is either a translucent lens – acting as a focus of subject to object – or it is opaque, reflecting back to the subject its own projections.
Narcissism describes a state of ‘being lost’ in your own reflection; words referring back to self, warping the image, and/or inverting it.

[Lorikeet (Satyr)]

Nihilistic Schizophrenia
When noumena are detached from phenomena, and words are redefined to represent pure abstractions – with no external reference point – and when the world, through its effect on body, conflicts with the mind’s fabrications, then mind finds refuge in internal fragmentations.
Processing stimulations from world – through body, via nervous system – it struggles to justify them within its internal, noetic uni-verse.
World becomes unnecessarily complex. The simplest phenomena – already understood intuitively, instinctively – becomes mysterious, other-worldly; the standard of evaluation is intentionally projected “beyond space/time” where it can neither be attained, nor questioned.

[Lorikeet (Satyr)]

Aristocratic Narcissism
To value what is superior only when it is of oneself – delusion of the noble God-king. Not to be inspired by greatness – or admire it when it cannot be attained – but to present oneself – purified and sanctified – as what is deserving of admiration and of emulation.
Subjectivization of the standard of evaluating the exceptional, is part of the nihilistic paradigm.[size=50] [ MANifesto: Nihilism][/size]

[Meno2 (Meno_)]

So agreed it is a learning process, but the development is not in - sight of the appearent association as anything but what the now cliche indicates: the right hand does not ‘know’ what the left hand is doing; namely, the archaic modus differ and has come home to roost in behaviorism, albeit the magic being replaced by pills.

What kind of being is this which can only learn like children who start to count by the show of the hands’ parts, the fingers held up?

The theories displayed do not concern with the magic of regression to physiologically unlearned processes that came to represent magic tribal and otherwise, taboo and totem transplanted to the function of parts of brain matter. Magic can hide this, perhaps magic needs to be kept alive esp. for kids to never stop belief in Santa and fairy tales and what dreams are , mean some thing.

[Lorikeet (Satyr)]

When a mind becomes alienated from its immediate environment, and from parts of itself and its inheritance (its history), it turns inward for support and for a substitution, trying to preserve its ethereal and shaky core identification. In the process it loses itself in itself. It attaches upon what it is aware of as itself, and loses its sight in its own gaze.
When a mind is inundated with too much sensual input – mostly worthless and unreliable data – its stress increases to an unusual level, overwhelming it with a spontaneous compulsion to detach part of its consciousness as a means of sheltering itself from the consequences of imminent collapse – in effect, it portions and compartmentalizes its consciousness, avoiding complete fragmentation.

[Lorikeet (Satyr)]

One extreme end of narcissism can be found in the Christian “loving God,” subsequently recreated into an individualistic secular form to make the same concept universally acceptable, and marketable.
Judeo-Christian semiotics abound in western civilizations. We see them – but do not notice them – in pop-art, in movies, as product placement, or seemingly casual noisy backgrounds; all of it a testament to its dominion over a civilization that was infected and lost a very long time ago.
Lacking any alternate tradition to attach to it settles either for materialism, and the ensuing hedonistic distractions, or it grabs onto the first ideal – preferably as exotic as possible – accentuating false impressions of becoming connected to something more powerful than a mundane world.

[Lorikeet (Satyr)]

Communal schizophrenia characterizes modern civilization. Man grows aware of himself, and thinks another is watching him, or watching over him; he acts and thinks as if he were but the instrument of an-otherness; he talks to himself – in his solitude, arrogantly believing he is hearing the voices of spirits and gods.
The mind’s self-controlling agencies have the potential to drive a man insane.

[Lorikeet (Satyr)]

Modern minds are trained to mask their insecurities behind redirecting platitudes, happily preaching selflessness so as to make their own selfishness more palatable and efficient; preaching ‘universal love’ so as to ensure that they will be showered with its glory.

[Lorikeet (Satyr)]

Schizophrenia: dividing pleasure from need/suffering, and/or lust from love; body detaching/escaping from mind.
Mind/body divisions remain comforting dichotomies, offering the potential for compartmentalized behaviours. Sometimes this context, and then the other applies; the two never harmonizing and never in dispute.

[Meno2 (Meno_)]

Sorry for oreckusion befitted considering linguistic, aristocratic and hihilistic variables, will get to those later in the day, but yes, patently, presumptive assertions, -hypothesis and the neuro brain philosophy, do effect phenomenon, reducing complex conscious events’ appparence got an absurd level, where the gestalt deconstructs the image receptors toward absurdity, which incidentally has gained relevance as a significant art form.

I am an ardent follower with associating supernaturalist and supernaturalist with Salvador Dali”s defensive expression for his blown up and melted to smeethereens objects of apperception.
His derangement offers defensive methods to appreciate a methodologically reduced phenomenal non-objectivity.

[Lorikeet (Satyr)]

@Brown

How then does the unconscious ‘transform itself into an external perception in order to become conscious? If this theorem is interpreted in the light of the transference phenomenon, then it follows that the repressed impulses must first find real objects in the external world and attach themselves to those real objects before their nature can become manifest to the subject. To put it crudely, the act of love (or hate) must accompany knowledge of repressed love (or hate). Freud, with his misgivings on the whole subject of transference, did not interpret his own theorem that the unconscious, in order to become conscious, must transform itself into external perceptions, as we have done, in the light of the transference. Instead, he says that the unconscious becomes conscious by getting connected with words ’the verbal images which correspond to it’; these verbal images are memory-residues of external perceptions; the work of analysis supplies verbal images of this kind which act as connecting links between the unconscious and consciousness.
If this complicated phraseology is reduced to its crude essence, it means that talk can cure, at least that talk can make the unconscious conscious. While one can appreciate the reasons why Freud, as therapist and as a man for whom pure theory made life worth living, would want to exalt the power of the word his god Logos, as he says it is easy to demonstrate, with the aid of Freud, that words have no such power.

Freud’s Jewish heritage reveals itself through his word selection, concealing deeds; noumenon rather than the unruly phenomenon.

@Brown

Word-consciousness is here presented not as cure, not as true consciousness, but as an intensification of the sickness which is also a halfway house to cure, or true consciousness:

@Freud

The cathexis of the verbal idea is not part of the act of repression, but represents the first of the attempts at recovery or cure which so conspicuously dominate the clinical picture of schizophrenia. These endeavors are directed toward regaining the lost objects, and it may well be that to achieve this purpose their path to the object must be by way of the word belonging to it; they then have, however, to content themselves with words in the place of things.

Words, says Freud, are a halfway house to lost things; and words are only one class of the sets of symbols that make up human culture.

@LaBarre.

If we could not have schizophrenics we also could not have cultures

Freud’s analysis of word-consciousness deepens our understanding not only of language as neurosis, but also of culture as neurosis and of culture as a ‘substitute-gratification,’ a provisional arrangement in the quest for real enjoyment.

Substitute gratification through the power of words, no less.

@Brown

The proportion of mere chatter verbal gymnastics with Freudian terms with only fugitive relation to reality bears comparison with the narcissistic overvaluation of words in schizophrenia. Nor does the relation between psychoanalysis and schizophrenia deprive it entirely of therapeutic value.
Freud himself says that the overvaluation of words in schizophrenia ‘represents the first of the attempts at recovery or cure.’
If ultimate cure consists in finding real objects in external reality corresponding to the lost objects of childhood, then what psychoanalysis does is to effect an immense withdrawal of libido from the macrocosm of the external world, which Freud (and modern man in general) tightly could not love, and to direct it to the microcosm of the internal world. Such narcissistic withdrawal from the outside world is of course the characteristic posture of the libido in schizophrenia.
In so far as this libidinal posture goes with a recognition of the unloveliness of the external world, it represents an advance in reality thinking.
But in so far as psychoanalysis deflects attention from a further advance, to make external reality such that it can be loved, it can be an obstacle in the way of a final attainment of truth. For psychoanalysis and before it the mystics has taught that only when we can love the world can we have true knowledge of ourselves.

Movement from the noumenon – solipsistic, infantile, self-gratifying, pleasure-principle ([size=80]feminine[/size]) – towards the phenomenon – troubling, challenging, reality-principle ([size=80]masculine[/size]); a voyage from infancy towards maturity, where the final destination promises a renewed appreciation for what has been left behind.
Modern sheltering systems disrupt this process, preserving its members in a state of perpetual infancy, seeking approval support, and guidance…

@Brown

Freud recognizes that the truths which he himself discovered through ‘moral courage’ i.e., by courageous recognition of the contradictions between the libido and reality could be absorbed into a higher level of knowledge in a utopia based on love. And then Freud rejects the utopian orientation as incompatible with ‘the processes of Nature’ and ‘the aims of human society.’
The rejection of the utopian perspective means that the libido so courageously, and narcissistically, withdrawn from the external world cannot return to the external world in the form of a project to transform it. Freud is left in alienation from reality and in pessimism.

Freud could not reconcile his own pleasure-principle with the reality-principle, leaving us with his neurotic words. Forcing “civilized man” into a state of schizophrenic (splintering), endless chatter, and narcissism.

@Brown

Orthodox psychoanalytical therapy fails to direct the libido back to the external world in the form of a project to change the world; by the same token it fails to provide a solution to the problem of aggression. Psychoanalytical consciousness, by returning to the microcosm of the inner world, puts at the disposal of the ego large quantities of libido that were previously in a state of repression. The result in so far as psychoanalytical consciousness gets through words to reality is to make us aware for the first time of the scope and nature of our real desires in Rilke’s beautiful phrase, the unlived lines of our body. And then what is the psychoanalytically conscious ego going to do with its newly discovered desires?
Once the limitations of sublimation and the impossibility of ‘rising above the crude life of the instincts’ are recognized, orthodox psychoanalysis, as a result of its inability to transform itself into social criticism, has to send human desire back into repression again. Freud’s earlier optimistic hopes of precluding repression through psychoanalytical consciousness are replaced by the theorem that psychoanalytical consciousness ‘reconstructs the repressions from more solid material.’
In other words psychoanalysis, after showing us the unlived lines of our body, tells us to forget them, presumably because they are not compatible with ‘the processes of Nature’ or ‘the aims of human society.’ And of course the institution of these new ’ego-sytonic controls,’ if we take Freud’s theory of aggression seriously, means the internalization of the aggression released by all instinctual renunciation.

Nihilism, and its discontents; those “chosen” to suffer, because they are unable to let go of logos – numbers/words – providing them with pleasing constructs.

@Brown

In fact, if we hold fast to the Freudian insight into the immortal strength of our repressed desires, changing reality can be the only rational response of the ego to the contradiction between reality and the pleasure-principle which reigns supreme in the id.
In the conflict between the ego, the id, and reality, something has to give.
In a neurosis, according to Freud, the ego accepts reality and its energy is directed against the id, but to maintain the repression it must ignore the part of reality associated with the repressed wishes.
In a psychosis the ego is overwhelmed by the id, severs its connection with reality, and proceeds to create for itself a new outer and inner world.
The healthy reaction, according to Freud, like a neurosis, does not ignore reality; like a psychosis it creates a new world, but, unlike psychosis, it creates a new world in the real world; that is, it changes reality.

@Freud

Neurosis does not deny the existence of reality, it merely tries to ignore it; psychosis denies it and tries to substitute something else for it. A reaction which combines features of both of these is the one we call normal or ‘healthy’; it denies reality as little as neurosis, but then, like psychosis, is concerned with effecting a change in it.
This expedient normal attitude leads naturally to some achievement in the outer world and is not content, like a psychosis, with establishing the alteration within itself; it is no longer auto-plastic but allo-plastic.

Psychoanalysis, unless it is transformed into a critique of reality, resembles a psychosis in being autoplastic in its aim as well as in its faith in the magic word.

Faced with a brutal, indifferent world, the ego attempts to escape, either in the hormonal narcotic of pleasure itself, or in the pleasing reflection of its own utopia/paradise – an idealized self, living in an idealized world; world deflated and the self-inflated.

[Meno2 (Meno_)]

Again ibid, as to this sequence, truistic representations to assert the absolute reaffirmation of magic and or thinking magically as children x because deconstruction is unavoidable the entropic collapse is here and the germ is infecting, but not a-pro-po, as effective signs of collapse intra psychic signs that commune per religious commutation, but through the failure to effect social and political communities who can understand social-security as a general generic objectively seeded part of his hybrid nature.

Men have to conjoin as they do clasp hands to believe to believe, not hype good intention em without dereliction.

Art for art’s sake? Who art?

[Meno2 (Meno_)]

So? What if psychoanalysis has dissolved seminal images into configured mandalas?

It’s not that it has lost effectiveness and meaning, but phantasmagoric images of porn do help according to some , to establish visual challenges that coincide with your compelling references to link if not entangle primal instinct, magic-and even Ai rehabilitated intention to seek higher motifs.

Thank you. Genetically inferred inferiority deferred to other pockets of comparmentalized and disassociated fetishized.

That goes to aryans as well as those who have been cut, not necessarily in a vampire’s den, and not with a premordial scholastic double edge either.

[Meno2 (Meno_)]

@Lorikeet

@Brown

How then does the unconscious ‘transform itself into an external perception in order to become conscious? If this theorem is interpreted in the light of the transference phenomenon, then it follows that the repressed impulses must first find real objects in the external world and attach themselves to those real objects before their nature can become manifest to the subject. To put it crudely, the act of love (or hate) must accompany knowledge of repressed love (or hate). Freud, with his misgivings on the whole subject of transference, did not interpret his own theorem that the unconscious, in order to become conscious, must transform itself into external perceptions, as we have done, in the light of the transference. Instead, he says that the unconscious becomes conscious by getting connected with words ’the verbal images which correspond to it’; these verbal images are memory-residues of external perceptions; the work of analysis supplies verbal images of this kind which act as connecting links between the unconscious and consciousness.
If this complicated phraseology is reduced to its crude essence, it means that talk can cure, at least that talk can make the unconscious conscious. While one can appreciate the reasons why Freud, as therapist and as a man for whom pure theory made life worth living, would want to exalt the power of the word his god Logos, as he says it is easy to demonstrate, with the aid of Freud, that words have no such power.

Freud’s Jewish heritage reveals itself through his word selection, concealing deeds; noumenon rather than the unruly phenomenon.

@Brown

Word-consciousness is here presented not as cure, not as true consciousness, but as an intensification of the sickness which is also a halfway house to cure, or true consciousness:

@Freud

The cathexis of the verbal idea is not part of the act of repression, but represents the first of the attempts at recovery or cure which so conspicuously dominate the clinical picture of schizophrenia. These endeavors are directed toward regaining the lost objects, and it may well be that to achieve this purpose their path to the object must be by way of the word belonging to it; they then have, however, to content themselves with words in the place of things.

Words, says Freud, are a halfway house to lost things; and words are only one class of the sets of symbols that make up human culture.

@LaBarre.

If we could not have schizophrenics we also could not have cultures

Freud’s analysis of word-consciousness deepens our understanding not only of language as neurosis, but also of culture as neurosis and of culture as a ‘substitute-gratification,’ a provisional arrangement in the quest for real enjoyment.

Substitute gratification through the power of words, no less.

@Brown

The proportion of mere chatter verbal gymnastics with Freudian terms with only fugitive relation to reality bears comparison with the narcissistic overvaluation of words in schizophrenia. Nor does the relation between psychoanalysis and schizophrenia deprive it entirely of therapeutic value.
Freud himself says that the overvaluation of words in schizophrenia ‘represents the first of the attempts at recovery or cure.’
If ultimate cure consists in finding real objects in external reality corresponding to the lost objects of childhood, then what psychoanalysis does is to effect an immense withdrawal of libido from the macrocosm of the external world, which Freud (and modern man in general) tightly could not love, and to direct it to the microcosm of the internal world. Such narcissistic withdrawal from the outside world is of course the characteristic posture of the libido in schizophrenia.
In so far as this libidinal posture goes with a recognition of the unloveliness of the external world, it represents an advance in reality thinking.
But in so far as psychoanalysis deflects attention from a further advance, to make external reality such that it can be loved, it can be an obstacle in the way of a final attainment of truth. For psychoanalysis and before it the mystics has taught that only when we can love the world can we have true knowledge of ourselves.

Movement from the noumenon – solipsistic, infantile, self-gratifying, pleasure-principle ([size=80]feminine[/size]) – towards the phenomenon – troubling, challenging, reality-principle ([size=80]masculine[/size]); a voyage from infancy towards maturity, where the final destination promises a renewed appreciation for what has been left behind.
Modern sheltering systems disrupt this process, preserving its members in a state of perpetual infancy, seeking approval support, and guidance…

@Brown

Freud recognizes that the truths which he himself discovered through ‘moral courage’ i.e., by courageous recognition of the contradictions between the libido and reality could be absorbed into a higher level of knowledge in a utopia based on love. And then Freud rejects the utopian orientation as incompatible with ‘the processes of Nature’ and ‘the aims of human society.’
The rejection of the utopian perspective means that the libido so courageously, and narcissistically, withdrawn from the external world cannot return to the external world in the form of a project to transform it. Freud is left in alienation from reality and in pessimism.

Freud could not reconcile his own pleasure-principle with the reality-principle, leaving us with his neurotic words. Forcing “civilized man” into a state of schizophrenic (splintering), endless chatter, and narcissism.

@Brown

Orthodox psychoanalytical therapy fails to direct the libido back to the external world in the form of a project to change the world; by the same token it fails to provide a solution to the problem of aggression. Psychoanalytical consciousness, by returning to the microcosm of the inner world, puts at the disposal of the ego large quantities of libido that were previously in a state of repression. The result in so far as psychoanalytical consciousness gets through words to reality is to make us aware for the first time of the scope and nature of our real desires in Rilke’s beautiful phrase, the unlived lines of our body. And then what is the psychoanalytically conscious ego going to do with its newly discovered desires?
Once the limitations of sublimation and the impossibility of ‘rising above the crude life of the instincts’ are recognized, orthodox psychoanalysis, as a result of its inability to transform itself into social criticism, has to send human desire back into repression again. Freud’s earlier optimistic hopes of precluding repression through psychoanalytical consciousness are replaced by the theorem that psychoanalytical consciousness ‘reconstructs the repressions from more solid material.’
In other words psychoanalysis, after showing us the unlived lines of our body, tells us to forget them, presumably because they are not compatible with ‘the processes of Nature’ or ‘the aims of human society.’ And of course the institution of these new ’ego-sytonic controls,’ if we take Freud’s theory of aggression seriously, means the internalization of the aggression released by all instinctual renunciation.

Nihilism, and its discontents; those “chosen” to suffer, because they are unable to let go of logos – numbers/words – providing them with pleasing constructs.

@Brown

In fact, if we hold fast to the Freudian insight into the immortal strength of our repressed desires, changing reality can be the only rational response of the ego to the contradiction between reality and the pleasure-principle which reigns supreme in the id.
In the conflict between the ego, the id, and reality, something has to give.
In a neurosis, according to Freud, the ego accepts reality and its energy is directed against the id, but to maintain the repression it must ignore the part of reality associated with the repressed wishes.
In a psychosis the ego is overwhelmed by the id, severs its connection with reality, and proceeds to create for itself a new outer and inner world.
The healthy reaction, according to Freud, like a neurosis, does not ignore reality; like a psychosis it creates a new world, but, unlike psychosis, it creates a new world in the real world; that is, it changes reality.

@Freud

Neurosis does not deny the existence of reality, it merely tries to ignore it; psychosis denies it and tries to substitute something else for it. A reaction which combines features of both of these is the one we call normal or ‘healthy’; it denies reality as little as neurosis, but then, like psychosis, is concerned with effecting a change in it.
This expedient normal attitude leads naturally to some achievement in the outer world and is not content, like a psychosis, with establishing the alteration within itself; it is no longer auto-plastic but allo-plastic.

Psychoanalysis, unless it is transformed into a critique of reality, resembles a psychosis in being autoplastic in its aim as well as in its faith in the magic word.

Faced with a brutal, indifferent world, the ego attempts to escape, either in the hormonal narcotic of pleasure itself, or in the pleasing reflection of its own utopia/paradise – an idealized self, living in an idealized world; world deflated and the self-inflated.[/quot

Yes but that is precisely the object of rationale contra Nietzche, that such must entail a return, to a premodern balance, a reattribution of the original, hidden , and not at all coming from nowhere there was a time when coming to. Beauty did not necessarily entail shame, it could only envision some state, that should be re created if it could not be preservei don’t know, nor gotta go somewhere before getting up.

[Lorikeet (Satyr)]

@Cesar

Arieti distinguishes between a ‘paleologic’ form of thinking, and the thinking that comes from ‘Aristotelian logic’ that rules Western man.
Since the first edition of his book Arieti points out that the paleologic thinking, which modern man only experiences in dreams, was omnipresent in prehistoric cultures. In order to avoid a runaway anxiety that drives the victim into panic, the patient diagnosed as schizophrenic abandons the Aristotelian norms of intuitive logic and lapses into the sort of thinking of our most primitive ancestors. Like John Modrow, Arieti acknowledges the value of the work of Harry Sullivan about the panic the child experiences as a result of an all-out emotional assault from both parents.
The paleologic regression can be adapted years after the abuse occurred, even when the child has become economically independent.
The withdrawal from reality, or psychotic breakdown, is the last and most desperate attempt of the unconscious to maintain the ego in a state of internal cohesion.
A dramatic regressive metamorphosis arises when, one after another, the defenses that the victim had been using do not work anymore. To a greater or lesser degree all human beings function with a dose of neurosis, but in the psychotic outbreak, when neurotic defenses collapse, the subject falls into even more archaic forms of defense: mechanisms which had been overcome millennia ago, a regression to the bicameral mind.
[size=80][Day of Wrath][/size]

A fascinating hypothesis, attributing modern nihilism to childhood abuse; abuse taking the form of coddling, akin to the old practice of swaddling – wrapping the child so tightly as to prevent its free movement.
In current terms, the protective wrappings – inhibiting thinking – are verbal, and the role of abusive parent are played by institutions, imposing constraining mental rules. Subsequently the unwrapping of the body compensates for the swaddling of the brain – body is freed from past/nature, as the mind is imprisoned within nihilistic bondage. Physical pleasure converting stress to relief.
According to this theory the child, wanting to expand outwards, confronted by abusive parents, blames itself – absolving parental institutions of all responsibility. The child grows up to feel sinful; ashamed, of itself. The schism between subjective & objective helps it compartmentalize – protecting it from any harmful realizations. Christian psychosis is a good example of it – an abusive deity converting its creations into groveling self-haters.

@Cesar

Arieti’s book contains chapters about his clinical experiences with patients.
In the case of two brothers, Arieti describes how one of them suffered a pre-psychotic panic as a result of the abuse at home and observes that, once in a florid state of psychosis

@Arieti

, ‘The paleologician confuses the physical world with the psychological one.
Instead of finding a physical explanation for an event, he looks for a personal motivation or an intention as the cause of an event.

Just as the primitive man, in a definitive breakdown of the Aristotelian superstructure, for the disturbed individual the world turns itself animist; each external event having a profound meaning. There are no coincidences for those who inhabit the world of magical thinking.
Both the primitive animist and the modern schizophrenic live in distinct dimensions compared to the rational man.
The conceptualization of external happenings as impersonal physical forces requires a much more advanced level of cognition than seeing them as personal agents.
Arieti wrote:

@Arieti

If the Greeks are afflicted by epidemics, it is because Phoebus wants to punish Agamemnon. Paranoiacs and paranoids interpret almost everything as manifesting a psychological intention or meaning. In many cases practically everything that occurs is interpreted as willed by the persecutors of the patient.

…Nevertheless, Arieti disagrees with the theoretical psychiatrists who see no similarities between schizophrenic and non-schizophrenic.
He believes that such points of view ‘are fundamentally wrong,’ and, speaking of non-Western cultures and even of the times of CroMagnon man, he writes:

@Arieti

Often the culture itself imposes paleologic conceptions and habits on the individual, even though the individual is capable of high forms of thinking. The more abundant is the paleologic thinking in a culture, the more difficult it is for the culture to get rid of it.

This last phrase reminds me how presently Western culture imposes relativist conceptions on the individual, even though the typical Westerner is potentially capable of discriminating among inferior cultures: a higher form of thinking.
Arieti also raises the question of why civilization originated only ten thousand years ago. Like Jaynes, he believes that the incredibly long gestation of civilization had to do with the persistence of paleologic thought, and he adds that presently the paleologic defense mechanisms underlie the human psyche and can return in extreme conditions.
[size=80][Day of Wrath][/size]

Assaulted by reality – through a speaker, an external agent – the modern returns to his childhood abuse. The ones exposing him to negative memories become representations of the abusive parental figure now absolved of responsibility so as to sanctify them, or demonized to re-sanctify them as oneself.

[Lorikeet (Satyr)]

Out of self-hate emerges this turning away into oneself. A way of consolidating what remains of self-esteem.