#with humanistic values at its core?

[metamorphesque]

tsk tsk ... so much for the cop of "peace" (source)

Just a reminder that only three months after completing the long-planned ethnic cleansing of Artsakh by forcing out Armenians, the indigenous population with a history of thousands of years, azerbaijan won the bid to host the United Nations' climate summit in November 2024. Rather than being held accountable for this atrocity — part of a multi-stage strategy of a second genocide of Armenians — azerbaijan has been rewarded.

[opencommunion]

one reason (white) queer people misuse the term homonationalism is that they see queerness (or whatever you want to call it) as naturally disaffiliated with the US empire. so they understand homonationalism as a divergence from a natural mutual antagonism between queerness and empire. they talk about homonationalism as if it's an exclusively "normie gay" project, and as if it's a divergence from, rather than a consequence of, the overall trajectory of western lgbtqia+ politics. ironically it’s that self-exceptionalization by the queer, on the basis of their queerness, that imbricates them in homonationalism. they produce themselves as a homonationalist subject, and reproduce homonationalism, every time they articulate their queerness as individualized freedom. and Puar actually anticipates all of this in her original theorization of homonationalism in Terrorist Assemblages, and that's why it really helps to go to the text instead of osmosing queer theory solely through tumblr posts (esp when tumblr is so white and the queer theorists are not): "Some may strenuously object to the suggestion that queer identities, like their 'less radical' counterparts, homosexual, gay, and lesbian identities, are also implicated in ascendant white American nationalist formations, preferring to see queerness as singularly transgressive of identity norms. This focus on transgression, however, is precisely the term by which queerness narrates its own sexual exceptionalism.

While we can point to the obvious problems with the emancipatory, missionary pulses of certain (U.S., western) feminisms and of gay and lesbian liberation, queerness has its own exceptionalist desires: exceptionalism is a founding impulse, indeed the very core of a queerness that claims itself as an anti-, trans-, or unidentity. The paradigm of gay liberation and emancipation has produced all sorts of troubling narratives: about the greater homophobia of immigrant communities and communities of color, about the stricter family values and mores in these communities, about a certain prerequisite migration from home, about coming-out teleologies. We have less understanding of queerness as a biopolitical project, one that both parallels and intersects with that of multiculturalism, the ascendancy of whiteness, and may collude with or collapse into liberationist paradigms. While liberal underpinnings serve to constantly recenter the normative gay or lesbian subject as exclusively liberatory, these same tendencies labor to insistently recenter the normative queer subject as an exclusively transgressive one. Queerness here is the modality through which 'freedom from norms' becomes a regulatory queer ideal that demarcates the ideal queer. ... I am thinking of queerness as exceptional in a way that is wedded to individualism and the rational, liberal humanist subject, what [Sara] Ahmed denotes as 'attachments' and what I would qualify as deep psychic registers of investment that we often cannot account for and are sometimes best seen by others rather than ourselves. 'Freedom from norms' resonates with liberal humanism’s authorization of the fully self-possessed speaking subject, untethered by hegemony or false consciousness, enabled by the life/stylization offerings of capitalism, rationally choosing modern individualism over the ensnaring bonds of family. In this problematic definition of queerness, individual agency is legible only as resistance to norms rather than complicity with them, thus equating resistance and agency.

... Queerness as automatically and inherently transgressive enacts specific forms of disciplining and control, erecting celebratory queer liberal subjects folded into life (queerness as subject) against the sexually pathological and deviant populations targeted for death (queerness as population). Within that orientation of regulatory transgression, queer operates as an alibi for complicity with all sorts of other identity norms, such as nation, race, class, and gender, unwittingly lured onto the ascent toward whiteness. ... To be excused from a critique of one’s own power manipulations is the appeal of white liberalism, the underpinnings of the ascendancy of whiteness, which is not a conservative, racist formation bent on extermination, but rather an insidious liberal one proffering an innocuous inclusion into life."

Jasbir K. Puar, Terrorist Assemblages: Homonationalism in Queer Times (2007)

[omegaphilosophia]

The Philosophy of Authenticity

The concept of authenticity is deeply rooted in existentialist philosophy and has been a significant topic of discussion in various philosophical traditions. At its core, authenticity involves living a life that is true to one's self, values, and beliefs, rather than conforming to external pressures or societal expectations. This exploration delves into the philosophy of authenticity, its origins, key ideas, and its relevance in contemporary life.

Key Concepts in the Philosophy of Authenticity

Existentialism and Authenticity:

Origins: The notion of authenticity is most closely associated with existentialist philosophers such as Søren Kierkegaard, Martin Heidegger, and Jean-Paul Sartre.

Kierkegaard: Kierkegaard emphasized the importance of individual faith and subjective experience, urging individuals to make authentic choices that reflect their true selves.

Heidegger: In "Being and Time," Heidegger discusses authenticity as being true to one's own existence (Dasein) and not succumbing to the "they-self," which represents societal norms and expectations.

Sartre: Sartre's existentialism posits that existence precedes essence, meaning individuals must create their own essence through authentic choices, taking full responsibility for their actions.

Authenticity and Self-Discovery:

Concept: Authenticity involves a continuous process of self-discovery and self-creation.

Argument: To be authentic, one must engage in introspection and recognize their own desires, values, and beliefs, distinguishing them from those imposed by society.

Authenticity vs. Inauthenticity:

Concept: Inauthenticity arises when individuals conform to external pressures and live in a way that is not true to themselves.

Argument: Heidegger describes inauthenticity as living according to the "they-self," where individuals adopt the roles, behaviors, and beliefs dictated by others rather than their own.

Freedom and Responsibility:

Concept: Authenticity is closely linked to the existentialist notion of freedom and the responsibility that comes with it.

Argument: Sartre asserts that individuals are "condemned to be free," meaning they must take responsibility for their choices and the authenticity of their lives, without blaming external factors.

Authenticity in Modern Life:

Concept: The pursuit of authenticity remains relevant in the context of modernity, where societal norms, technological advancements, and consumer culture often challenge individual authenticity.

Argument: In contemporary society, maintaining authenticity involves resisting the pressures of social media, consumerism, and other external influences that promote a superficial or conformist lifestyle.

Theoretical Perspectives on Authenticity

Existentialist Perspective:

View: Existentialists emphasize the importance of individual choice and responsibility in achieving authenticity.

Argument: Authenticity is achieved through existential freedom, where individuals define their own essence and live according to their true selves.

Humanistic Psychology:

View: Humanistic psychologists like Carl Rogers and Abraham Maslow highlight authenticity as a crucial aspect of self-actualization and personal growth.

Argument: Authentic living is necessary for psychological well-being and fulfillment, as it allows individuals to realize their true potential.

Postmodern Critique:

View: Postmodern thinkers critique the concept of authenticity, questioning the possibility of a true, stable self in a world of constant change and fluid identities.

Argument: Authenticity may be seen as a constructed ideal rather than an attainable state, with the self being a product of various social, cultural, and historical influences.

Cultural and Social Perspectives:

View: Cultural and social theorists examine how authenticity is influenced by cultural norms and social contexts.

Argument: The quest for authenticity must consider the diverse ways in which different cultures and societies understand and value authentic living.

The philosophy of authenticity centers on the pursuit of a life that is true to one's self, free from the constraints of external pressures and societal expectations. Rooted in existentialist thought, it emphasizes self-discovery, individual freedom, and responsibility. While authenticity remains a crucial concept in contemporary life, it is also subject to critique and reinterpretation, reflecting the complexities of modern existence.

[biblioflyer]

Rediscovering Discovery: just what was that show?

Once upon a time I set myself a task. A task that was actually kind of the original inspiration of this blog. Namely to rewatch and analyze Star Trek Picard in pursuit of an answer to the question: Did Picard turn the Federation into a Dystopia? A series of essays I intend to revisit now with the benefit of season three pointing the way to where the show was headed.

I didn't fully succeed at the rewatch. Its still a "bucket list" item but I got 6/10ths of the way through the first season and I felt comfortable saying "no." Its a darker show and one that emphasizes character arcs, character experiences, and the performance of emotion over the stoic, proceduralist, "competency porn" that marked the TNG era. There has definitely been a pulling back from some of the conceits of TNG: that 24th century humanity was radically altered in some core way, almost genetically from us (at the time) 20th century brutes, and that the Federation was almost supernaturally wise and virtuous.

Empirically speaking, both of these concepts were always memes. Oh to be sure, we were seeing a civilization that avowed a particular set of values that resonated very strongly with a particular sort of 1990s secular humanist and generally behaves relatively virtuously if your preferences are wired towards amiability over conflict. Yet it wasn't without its blindspots. My Roman Empire is that the Federation's superpower is not that it is perfectly just and wise at all times and places, its that it is a society whose acculturation process creates people who are somewhat less egotistical, more curious, and less impulsive under stress with the end result being that as a civilization, its superpower is responding to new information with openness and alacrity.

Thus, while there are judicious complaints about Picard: I am not a fan of using the Federation abdicating responsibility for a fellow sentient species, even one it has been hostile with for centuries, as a metaphor for disowning the victims of far flung conflicts and cataclysms in the real world. I'm okay with a flawed Federation that needs to confront its own failings, but this was pretty extreme. Well mostly extreme. There are at least two times Picard had to be talked into saving a prewarp civilization from certain doom because something something Prime Directive even though the Enterprise could do it with trivial effort and with minimal chance of overtly disrupting the society in question. Data's penpal and Worf's brother's preindustrial people.

Overall, I land that Picard doesn't alter the setting beyond recognition, beyond being a setting where justice ultimately prevails, or beyond being fairly labeled "Star Trek."

So what about Discovery?

Now that its over, its as good a time as any for a retrospective. My intent is to watch the first season over again, because its been a loooong time. I've always tried to watch the show in a charitable spirit, much as I have Picard. I try to be radically self aware in that I know my opinions are subjective, that my preferences are rooted in my own values and experiences, and that other people could read the same situation in different ways.

In addition, there are always at least two ways to analyze Star Trek. There's the literal way: which is what is happening and what that tells us about the people and the universe (sometimes called Watsonian) and the Doylist: the "meta" aspects. What is the show actually trying to do from a storytelling standpoint? What symbols is it invoking? What storytelling shorthands is it using? What messages or themes is it trying to convey and, if these really are the correct messages, how well is it actually selling those themes?

To be frank, I've often not been the biggest fan of Discovery from a technical standpoint. I've often felt that its internal logic is sloppy and that, like Picard, it frequently undercuts the messaging I believe it is trying to convey with that very same poor internal logic or by relying heavily on "telling" rather than "showing" us what to think.

Star Trek as a franchise loves to look straight at the camera and lecture us primitive 20th/21st century apes on our failures. Maybe its the nostalgia, but Discovery and Picard have generally both felt like they are less trusting of their audience to interpret the correct moral of the story. Of course I could be parroting a popular complaint about modern fiction that emphasizes "progressive" themes that is itself very likely a perpetual complaint about fiction that emphasizes "progressive" themes, and of course grandpa TOS was the victim of "OG cancel culture" in the form of various networks in various localities threatening to or even outright refusing to air the episode with the Kirk/Uhura kiss.

So in no particular order what I want to investigate is:

Is Discovery "pedantic"? Pedantic being highly subjective. One quirk about me is that it makes me irritable to feel like I'm being lectured on appropriate conduct and beliefs by someone who I share beliefs with, but is articulating those beliefs in a way that makes me feel pandered to (as in I'm not sure the source is as committed as I am) or feels superficial, flattening, or essentializing.

Is Discovery a deconstruction of Star Trek? As in it subverts core ideas in a way that would irk people who are committed to those themes. If so, which themes and is this a good thing or a bad thing?

Are the augmentations, contradictions, and retcons from "established canon" interesting and worthwhile story devices? I'm not anti-retcon and I'm not a canon purist, Star Trek by virtue of having many, many, many contributors is better interpreted as a mythology than a wholly coherent setting; but retcons can and should be judged on their merits.

Is Burnham a "Mary Sue?" This is an almost useless question because of its subjectivity. Its extra useless because in Star Trek, almost every Starfleet character is a polymath capable of inventing entire new fields of science on the spot out of rocks and vibes. There's also a layer of sexism and colorism to it. To the fullest extent possible, I want to frame this question in terms of what are the consequences to the story and worldbuilding from having a main character and less on whether or not that main character has merit.

To some extent this will also address whether Burnham's narrative arcs have robust narrative logic or if there are "too many cooks in the kitchen" resulting in a character who presents as incoherent from episode to episode and successful by fiat. This is definitely something that I think was smoothed over in seasons 4 and 5, starting with what I think was an intentional shift in her characterization as early as season 3.

Its possible my own preference for the more measured tone of network TV era Trek may lead me into the same minefields as the trolls in comment sections across the internet, but I'm hoping to keep my self awareness vivid.

My intent is to go for the full first season. I'm looking forward to it because my memories are extremely fuzzy and I authentically would be delighted to find delights that I had forgotten about.

[aronarchy]

Anarchy and Transhumanism

Transhumanism… challenges essentialist definitions of the “human” and is sometimes framed as part of a wider discourse in feminist and queer theory concerned with cyborg identities and “inhumanisms.” Transhumanism can be seen as either an aggressive critique of humanism, or alternatively as an extension of specific humanist values beyond the arbitrary species category of “human.” Transhumanism demands that we interrogate our desires and values beyond the happenstance of What Is, accepting neither the authority of arbitrary social constructs like gender nor a blind fealty to how our bodies presently function.

As one would expect, transgender issues have been at the core of transhumanism from the start. But transhumanism radically expands on trans liberation to situate it as part of a much wider array of struggles for freedom in the construction and operation of our bodies and the surrounding world. A number of anarcho-transhumanists work on immediately practical projects that give people more control over their bodies—the operation of abortion clinics, the distribution of naloxone, or the 3D printing of open-source prosthetics for children. But transhumanists also ask radical questions like: Why is it not only the case that our society is okay with the involuntary decay and death of the elderly but also that it moralizes in support of their perpetual extermination?

The struggle for life extension is certainly not the entirety of transhumanism, but it is an important example of the kind of campaign transhumanists initiated and continue, shockingly, to fight largely alone. The notion that an objectively “good life” extends to seventy or a hundred years but no further is clearly arbitrary, and yet the opinion that it does is both nearly universally held and violently defended. Many early transhumanists were shocked by this response, but it illustrates how people can easily become staunch defenders of existing catastrophes for fear of otherwise having to reconsider standing assumptions in their own lives. In the same way that people will defend mandatory military service or murdering animals for food, the arguments for death are clearly defensive rationalizations—and rational responses are easy to formulate:

“Death gives life its meaning.” Yet how is death at seventy years old more meaningful than death at five years old or at two hundred years old? If an eighty-year-old woman gets to live and work on her poetry for another five decades, does that really undermine your capacity to find meaning so badly that you’d prefer to see her murdered?

“We would get bored.” This seems nothing more than a call to build a world that isn’t boring! Never mind the wild possibilities embedded in both anarchism and transhumanism; it would take almost three hundred thousand years to read every book in existence today. There are already 100 million recorded songs in the world. There are thousands of languages with their own conceptual ecosystems and their own poetry. There are hundreds of fields of inquiry, rich and fascinating, in which to immerse yourself. There are vast arrays of experiences and novel kinds of relationships to explore. Surely we can do with a few more centuries at least.

“Old, static perspectives would clog up the world.” It’s a pretty absurd and horrifying to instinctively appeal to genocide as the best means to solve the problem of the rigidity of people’ perspectives or identities. Over a hundred billion humans have died since the arrival of Homo sapiens on the scene. At best they were only able to convey the tiniest sliver of their subjective experiences, their insights and dreams, before everything else inside them was abruptly snuffed out. People say that every time an elder dies it’s like a library’s being burned to the ground. We’ve already lost 100 billion libraries! There are no doubt infinite myriad ways we might live and change, but it would be strange indeed if the sharp binary of sudden, massive, and irreversible loss that is currently standard were universally ideal.

Life extension is an illustrative example that gets to the heart of what transhumanism offers as a continuation of anarchism’s radicalism: the capacity to demand that unexamined norms or conventions justify themselves, to challenge things otherwise accepted.

Anarcho-transhumanism breaks down many other common operating assumptions about the world, just as it seeks to expand and explore the scope of what is possible. Radicalism is all about pressing assumptions and models into alien contexts and seeing what breaks down in order to better clarify what dynamics are more fundamentally rooted. Anarcho-transhumanism seeks to advance anarchism through this kind of clarification—to get it into better fighting shape so it can deal more effectively with the future, to make it capable of fighting in all situations, not just those specific to particular contexts.

[cleoselene]

I think about The Good Place and how it ranks as one of my favorite shows of all time (and definitely my favorite comedy) and what was so appealing about it was not just the writing and the characters, but the concept was so... humanist? For a show about the afterlife.

Like there was never a focus on finding God. It was about finding the best version of yourself, and how you can find that best version of yourself by loving other people and embracing them with their flaws, but also realizing that working on your own flaws makes you happier.

It's an extremely secular show for something that tackles such big philosophical questions. The magical things are exciting at first but ultimately unimpressive to these characters unless they have something real to love and lose. It shows the value of experiencing the full spectrum of human emotions, because if all you feel all the time is uninterrupted bliss, you become numb.

It starts out with the premise that Hell is other people, and leaves with concluding that heaven is also other people, and that you should do good things for others because it's just the right thing to do, and never is their a God figure. There are people with authority, people who have been empowered, like Gen, but she is never treated as God despite having the most power. Even the most powerful beings are shown as fallible and having the capacity to learn from mistakes.

It's just fundamentally a show where people get better because they want to become better people, and they want to be better TO other people. Just really humanist at its core.

[lancrewizzard]

I think I can finally articulate why I feel that the superior Good Omens adaptation is the radio play (audiomens). It isn't that the tv show (showmens? nah, doesn't work) veered further away from the source material, even though it did, because I think Audiomens' greatest weakness is its attempt at cramming as many original book lines into it as possible. It's all about the use of the medium as much as it's about the changes to the core themes of the book.

Audiomens made a very fun decision to have everything in the story essentially "overheard" without a need for a narrator. It means that several characters are more emotionally and self aware than they were in the book, but it generally works well and helps the listener suspend their disbelief as they hear the characters work through the story. We sadly lost the "Baby A, Baby B, and Baby C the Adversary, Destroyer of Kings, Angel of the Bottomless Pit, Great Beast that is called Dragon, Prince of This World, Father of Lies, Spawn of Satan, and Lord of Darkness" part, but enough good lines were kept in places they didn't fully fit that I can accept this was probably for the best. It's not perfect by any means but the way the story is told is, I think, the perfect fit for radio.

By contrast, TV Omens, despite the fact that they also had all the visual language of television at their disposal, chose to have a literally omniscient narrator. This immediately gave it the same weird moments as Audiomens where bits of the book are lifted wholecloth and delivered to the ears rather than finding a more elegant way to convey the information. Not only that but it undercuts the humanist message of the book, where God's existence is irrelevant, and what matter are the actions of normal* people. In the show, God is all knowing, watching events unfold, being involved in a way that seems completely at odds with the intentional separation even Aziraphale had to God in the book. In fact, in the radio play, it was Aziraphale who said the line about God being the dealer in the ineffable game of his own devising who won't tell you the rules and who smiles all the time.

I don't remember who revived the dove in Audiomens. I do remember that they remembered to include the random soldier who got disappeared by Aziraphale appearing back home in the US. I also remember that a minor demon got killed at Crowley's trial just to show the audience (us and the demons) the stakes. Life feels cheaper in the tv show, and I think that's terribly sad.

*for a given value of "normal" anyway

[skippyv20]

Story Syndicate = FRAUDS!!!

Hi Skippy & Friends-Pilgrim with a little research...UGGG!!! From The Hollywood Reporter...Netflix says ..."the series does more than illuminate one couple’s love story, it paints a picture of our world and how we treat each other."

Harry & Meghan is a Story Syndicate production in association with Archewell Productions and Diamond Docs. Executive producers include Garbus, Erica Sashin, Mark Monroe, Dan Cogan, Ben Browning, Chanel Pysnik, Jon Bardin, Mala Chapple and Angus Wall." Story Syndicate (55 Washington Street, #656 Brooklyn, NY 11201, (718)-230-5111 info@storysyndicate.com) is a NY based film & TV production company..."devoted to premium nonfiction and scripted content." Founded in 2019 by award winners, Liz Garbus and Dan Cogan "it provides a home for talented filmmakers, producers, jounalists, thinkers and artists to create innovative ambitious and elevated visual content."

It gets even worse... "We are committed to nurturing and executing ambitious ideas and doing so with sincerity, transparency, and artistry. Our core values are those that have driven Dan’s and Liz’s careers for the 20+ years they’ve been working as storytellers: creator-friendly, platform-friendly, humanistic, diverse, and relentlessly focused on quality. As expert facilitators, we provide filmmakers the creative and operational infrastructure they need, while also using our own creative pipeline to match ideas we love with emerging filmmakers. Rather than serving a single consumer, Story Syndicate aligns the interests of many stakeholders as part of its philosophy. We aim to serve platforms, filmmakers, partners, and our viewers themselves."

ARE YOU KIDDING ME??? YOU THINK THE ABOVE STANDS WITH YOUR PRODUCT CALLED HARRY & MEGHAN? Right now, there is not ONE mention of it anywhere on their website. Shame on all of them for their participation in creating the EXACT OPPOSITE of what they claim. There are laws for this level of FRAUD!!!  

Off to find out who Diamond Docs is.

Diamond Docs Involvement

Hi Skippy & Friends-Pilgrim with more info on the teams and people involved in making this huge mess. What baffles me is seeing the level of high-power professionals that could not seem to corral in PinEvil. That says quite a lot right there. This company produces very good documentaries that have won major awards. They work to real A+++ listers.

Out of the 4-person team for this company, Mark Monroe, a producer-writer, is the one who worked on the Harry & Megan series. Credits include films at Sundance every year for the last 10 years. He has worked with DeCaprio, Spielberg, and Ron Howard. With his kind of professional chops, how could he be rolled to sink to the level of what we are being shown right now? Was working with her sooo bad he just caved on content so he didn't go mad?

https://www.diamond-docs.com If you want to ask them that question, they only have an email request with no email address allowed to be seen! You can contact their talent agency...a Jake Dexter though. Hollyweird is so out there...That's all from chilly Cape Cod.

Thank you so much! Excellent and insightful post! Thank you for taking the time to research it for us all.🙂���️

[idigitizellp21]

Exploring Humanistic Psychotherapy: A Journey Of Self-Discovery

In the vast landscape of psychotherapy approaches, humanistic psychotherapy stands out as a deeply compassionate and client-centered approach to understanding and healing the human psyche. Developed in the mid-20th century by luminaries like Carl Rogers and Abraham Maslow, humanistic psychotherapy places the individual at the center of their own therapeutic journey. This blog explores the key principles, techniques, and benefits of humanistic psychotherapy while referencing some influential works in the field.

The Humanistic Paradigm

Humanistic psychotherapy is rooted in the belief that every individual has an innate drive toward self-actualization — a desire to fulfill their potential and become the best version of themselves. This contrasts with other therapeutic approaches that may focus on pathology or symptom reduction. Two foundational figures in humanistic psychology, Carl Rogers and Abraham Maslow, paved the way for this approach.

Carl Rogers and Client-Centered Therapy

Carl Rogers’ Client-Centered Therapy, outlined in his book “On Becoming a Person” (1961), emphasizes the importance of the therapeutic relationship. In this approach, the therapist provides an empathetic, non-judgmental, and unconditional positive regard for the client. This creates an environment where the client can explore their thoughts and emotions freely, fostering self-discovery and personal growth.

Abraham Maslow and Self-Actualization

Maslow’s “Motivation and Personality” (1954) introduced the hierarchy of needs, with self-actualization at its pinnacle. Humanistic therapists draw upon Maslow’s ideas to help clients move towards self-actualization by addressing basic needs like safety and belonging while also encouraging personal growth and creativity.

Core Principles of Humanistic Psychotherapy

1. Holistic Approach: Humanistic therapy views individuals as whole beings, incorporating their thoughts, emotions, behaviors, and spiritual dimensions into the therapeutic process.

2. Self-Exploration: Clients are encouraged to explore their feelings, beliefs, and values, fostering self-awareness and personal insight.

3. Non-Directive: Therapists act as facilitators, not directors, allowing clients to guide the sessions in a direction that feels most relevant to their personal growth.

4. Unconditional Positive Regard: Therapists provide unwavering acceptance and support, creating a safe space for clients to express themselves authentically.

Techniques in Humanistic Psychotherapy

1. Active Listening: Therapists practice empathetic listening to understand the client’s experiences without judgment or interpretation.

2. Reflection: Therapists reflect the client’s feelings and thoughts back to them, aiding self-awareness and deeper understanding.

3. Gestalt Therapy: Developed by Fritz Perls, this technique explores the integration of conflicting aspects of the self, often through role-playing or empty chair exercises.

Benefits of Humanistic Psychotherapy

1. Self-Discovery: Clients gain a deeper understanding of themselves, their values, and their goals, leading to increased self-acceptance and authenticity.

2. Enhanced Relationships: Improved self-awareness and empathy cultivated during therapy can enhance personal and professional relationships.

3. Personal Growth: Humanistic psychotherapy fosters personal growth and the pursuit of one’s potential, promoting a fulfilling and meaningful life.

Conclusion

Humanistic psychotherapy offers a profound and transformative approach to mental health and personal development. Rooted in the belief in each person’s potential for growth and self-actualization, it provides a therapeutic journey focused on self-discovery, empowerment, and authenticity. As Carl Rogers eloquently stated, “The curious paradox is that when I accept myself just as I am, then I can change.” In the realm of humanistic psychotherapy, this acceptance forms the foundation for lasting personal transformation.

– Urveez Kakalia.

[yhwhrulz]

Morning and Evening with A.W. Tozer Devotional: October 19th

Tozer in the Morning GOD AND THE INDIVIDUAL

When the eternal Son of God became the Son of Man and walked on this earth, He always called individuals to His side. Jesus did not come into the world to deal with statistics! He deals with individuals and that is why the Christian message is and always has been: "God loves the world! He loves the masses and throngs only because they are made up of individuals. He loves every individual person in the world!" In the great humanistic tide of our day, the individual is no longer the concern. We are pressed to think of the human race in a lump. We are schooled to think of the human race in terms of statistics. In many nations, the state is made to be everything and the individual means nothing at all. Into the very face and strength of this kind of humanism comes the Christian evangel, the good news of salvation, wondrously alight with the assurance for all who will listen: "You are an individual and you matter to God! His concern is not for genes and species but for the individuals He has created!"

Tozer in the Evening Man - The Dwelling Place of God - What Men Live By

HUMAN LIFE HAS ITS CENTRAL CORE where lie the things men live by. These things are constant. They change not from age to age, but are the same among all races throughout the world always.

Life also has its marginal zones where lie the things that are relatively unimportant. These change from generation to generation and vary from people to people.

It is at the central core that men are one, and it is on the marginal zones that they differ from each other. Yet the marginal things divide the peoples of the world radically and seriously. Most of the enmities of the earth have arisen from differences that did not matter basically; but because the people could not distinguish things men live by from things they live with these enmities arose between them, and often led to persecutions, murders and bloody wars.

Were men everywhere to ignore the things that matter little or not at all and give serious attention to the few really important things, most of the walls that divide men would be thrown down at once and a world of endless sufferings ended.

What does matter after all? What are the great facts that are good all the time everywhere among all men? What are the axiomatic truths upon which all human life may rest with confidence? Fortunately they are not many. Here are the chief ones:

Only God is great. Men have sought to place greatness elsewhere, in things, in events, in men; but the human soul is too great to attribute greatness to itself, and certainly too great to believe that things or events can possess true greatness.

The greatness that men seem to have is as the greatness of moonlight, which is but the glory of the sun reflected. Man's glory is borrowed. He shines in the light that never was on land or sea. He reflects God's greatness but has none of his own.

"Before Thy ever-blazing throne We ask no luster of our own."*

Only God is wise. Man's wisdom has ever been the badge of his superiority and the cause of his most arrogant pride; yet it fails him constantly. He cannot by his wisdom find the answer to the old questions concerning himself: Whence? What? Why? Whither? By it he cannot secure the blessings he wants most: to escape pain, to stay young and to stay alive.

Yet man boasts of his wisdom, God waits, the ages pass, and time and space and matter and motion and life and death join to tell us that only God is wise.

Apart from God nothing matters. We think that health matters, that freedom matters, or knowledge or art or civilization. And but for one insistent word they would matter indeed. That word is eternity.

Grant that men possess perpetual being and the preciousness of every earthly treasure is gone instantly. God is to our eternal being what our heart is to our body. The lungs, the liver, the kidneys have value as they relate to the heart. Let the heart stop and the rest of the organs promptly collapse. Apart from God, what is money, fame, education, civilization? Exactly nothing at all, for men must leave all these things behind them and one by one go to eternity. Let God hide His face and nothing thereafter is worth the effort.

Only what we do in God will remain to us at last.

Man is made in the image of his Creator and has an urge toward creative activity. When he left the Garden his creative urge did not leave him. He must build, always build; his materials may be brick, paint, musical notes, scientific data, systems of thought; but always he must build, from the boy that builds a toy to the man that builds an empire.

Yet time is against him, for it wears out everything it touches. Its grinding action makes dust of civilizations and cities and men. A lifetime of toil dies with the toiler. But God puts immortality in all our loving efforts for Him and shares His eternity with all who love and trust Him.

Human sin is real. Suspicion, hate, envy, power, lust and greed keep the world in a state of continual ferment, while bespectacled men stand unblinking and assure classes of eager students that the whole idea of sin is outmoded and sin itself non-existent.

In spite of all our smooth talk sin continues to ride the race of man. Until its heavy weight is lifted from the soul nothing else has any right to our attention, for sin shuts us out from the presence of the God whose favor alone gives life any satisfactory reason for being.

With God there is forgiveness. "The Lord God, merciful and gracious . . . keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin." So says the Old Testament. *"The Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins," says the New.

God's mercy heads up in the Man Christ Jesus who is God and man by the mystery of the Incarnation. He can and does forgive sin because the sin was committed against Him in the first place. The soul in Christ has found the One that matters. His heaviest problem is solved; his basic philosophy is sound; his eyes are open and he knows the true from the false.

Only what God protects is safe. All else perishes with the using or the hoarding. Paul knew this secret. He said, "He is able to keep that which I have committed unto him against that day."***

Blessed Treasure. Blessed Keeper. Blessed Day.

Exodus 34:6 * * Matthew 9: 6 *** 2 Timothy 1:12

Copyright Statement This material is considered in the public domain.

[maacwanowrie]

How to establish a recognisable visual style

Line, shape, colour, texture, type, space, and image are the seven foundational components of graphic design. Each has advantages and disadvantages of its own. You can advance your graphic design portfolio if you master these fundamental components. so short term graphic design courses in Pune have many opportunities to take on a range of new and exciting projects.

  1. Use your brand's identity

2. Identify your audience

3. Recognize the goal of your brand.

4. Adjust your resources

5. Be dependable

 1. Utilize your brand's identity in 

You may create a brand identity that unifies your mission, beliefs, and objectives in one place with the aid of a clearly defined brand strategy. You'll be able to anticipate your visual identity within this framework and maintain consistency throughout.

 Look at the athleisure clothing line LNDR, which, in the words of its creators, was developed for "the lifestyle we want to live, the items we want to wear, and the people we wanted to hang out with." The goods themselves have a straightforward design that prioritises durability and functionality. This viewpoint is suitably mirrored in LNDR's visual identity, which emphasises a clean design and a neutral colour scheme. Its graphic assets define the brand's identity and are instantly identifiable on everything from their website to their social media posts.

 2. Understand your audience

Consider that you need to choose what to dress as you prepare to attend a party. You should first think about where and who will be attending the soiree. Is it a sizable black-tie event or a casual outside cookout with a few friends? When you are aware of the party's setting, you can dress appropriately.

 When developing your visual identity, the same is valid. You may develop an acceptable visual language that effectively communicates with your goal audience if you have a thorough understanding of your target market.

 You must first create your buyer personas in order to better comprehend and connect with your target audience. By focusing on certain demographics like age, gender, income, education, values, views, and motives, you can establish precise criteria for who your brand should be targeting. This will then influence the visual identity decisions you make.

 3. Recognize the objective of your brand.

Your branding decisions will be influenced by your understanding of the motivation behind your company in every way. For instance, the cutting-edge mental wellness platform Real is transforming online counselling and de-stigmatizing mental illness. Each touchstone is impacted by the brand's purpose to "not just normalise mental health treatment, but celebrate it."

 Each visual element meticulously underscores the brand's mission to make therapy more approachable for a new generation, from Real's blue colour scheme—a colour associated with relaxation or serenity—to their use of hand-drawn artwork. Similar to their goods and aim, their design aesthetic is warm and humanistic.

 4. Adjust your resources

Understanding the intricacies of each medium can help you not only create better but also communicate better in order to maximise your visual identity. Even though your business may have a very explicit brand style guide, knowing how to apply it is just as crucial.

 Since several designers will work on various assets, they must comprehend the core visual identity in order to modify each asset appropriately. This can be as easy as making sure your logo design has the suitable size or resolution for use across various media or selecting the proper colour scheme for online documents as opposed to printed ones. To see this in action, look at some solid brand style guide examples.

 The visual identity of your brand will be stronger and more appealing to your audience if you pay attention to consumer behaviours, habits, and the reason behind each branding asset.

 05. Be dependable

Your visual identity requires consistency on two levels. Initially, as was already said, it serves as a guide for design decisions for your branding team. Consistency makes ensuring that every piece of branding collateral is uniform by directing the creative process with a purpose.

 Second, it has an impact on customers, stakeholders, and rivals on the outside. The only thing that keeps devoted customers coming back repeatedly is consistent branding. It's also important to remember that consistency doesn't have to mean rigidity: as a brand gains momentum and expands, it should develop. Simply put, brand consistency creates a solid foundation on which a brand can be built.

[in-sightpublishing]

Interview with Simon Parcher — President, Canadian Humanist Publications

Interview with Simon Parcher — President, Canadian Humanist Publications

Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Humanist Voices) Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2019/05/19 Simon Parcher is the President of Canadian Humanist Publications. He is also a Humanist, Humanist Celebrant. Scott Douglas Jacobsen: Let’s start from the general orientation of Humanist Perspectives. What is it? What are its core values as a publication? Simon…

[funkymbtifiction]

27 Tritype Connections

By Karkino.

How the combinations interact and/or amplify each other.

1 + 2 Node (125, 126, 127) The Guide • Enhance the natural wings of 1 and 2; • Double compliant; • May secretly feel as if they are better than others; • Feel that they must help people grow; • Mix of warmth and cold attitude; • May push people too much; "I know you can do better"; • Easily frustrated with laziness, inattentive behavior; • Strong internal critic; "I must show the example, I must be nice and accepting, etc." • Extremely sensitive to ungratefulness.

1 + 3 Line (135, 136, 137) The Super Achiever • Double competent; • Strong work ethics and desire to perform; • Internal critic : "I must deliver and be the best yet be humble about it"; • Internal struggle between the needs to be correct/fair and to be praised/admired; • On of the most productive and efficient combinations; • Perfectionist and Critical about their work and image; • Very sensitive to social recognition, even if not dominant social instinct; • Can become workaholic; "My work is my worth" • Very cold, rigid personality. May be a bit less strong with a 2 wing.

1 + 4 Line (145, 146, 147) The Humanist • Enhances the natural line of 1/4; • Double frustration; • Ethical and spiritual traits of the 1 is highlighted; • Hard to please, critical of self and others; • "There's always something missing ; You don't understand"; • Conflicting relationship with their emotions : refrain from feeling, then let go; • May have religious/spiritual tendencies; • Can become a highly refined individual, with unique tastes and values; • Can look very NF (MBTI) even if not.

1 + 5 Line (154, 153, 152) The Rational • Highly cerebral; • Usually displays intellectual tastes and hunger for knowledge; • Not easily satisfied with the superficial answers; knows what and how to search for them; • Very structured mind; likes to organize information (MBTI can modify that); • Attentive and focused; Can easily dive into its mind; • Very curious; always want to know why you think this or that; • Very aloof and distant, even with a 2 wing or fix; • Can give extremely detailed and structured information; • May be awkward in social settings, not known for its spontaneity.

1 + 6 Line (162, 163, 164) The Guardian • Double Compliant; • Most structured-oriented of all combinations; • Usually likes to plan ahead and know where they going; • Trust is not only a concept, but a vital line of conduct; • May be a bit intolerant of innovative and counterculture ideas; • Can often take a leadership role and be sensitive to the underdog cause; • Can look very SJ (MBTI) even if not; • Critical outlook but still can be congenial and understanding (especially if dominant self-preservation instinct).

1 + 7 Line (127, 137, 147) The Catalyst • Enhances the natural line of 1/7; • Very internally conflicted : wants structure and freedom; • May let go of the pressure of the internal critic more easily than the other 1 combinations; • Can look serious and enthusiastic at the same time; • Can implement order and morals in a fun and colorful way; • Perfectionist, even in their creative side; • May be hard to follow with their high ideals; • Unpredictable emotional demonstrations, mostly anger and frustration (especially if dominant sexual instinct); • Often a strong connection to their intuitive function (MBTI).

2 + 5 Line (125, 258, 259) The Advisor • Double rejection; • Emotionally guarded but appears amiable; • Often strong observational skills, especially for people; • Good listeners; • Sociable, but need time for themselves; • Help people by giving out advice, tips and personal knowledge; • Often express their anger in an indirect fashion, even if core 8; • Can spend a long time of their day observing and analyzing people; • Often hidden intentions, not truly open with what they want.

2 + 6 Line (126, 268, 269) The Helper • Double compliant; • Most service-oriented combination; • Attentive to others' needs; • Likes to be part of a team or be with people in general; • Values comes from being helpful and trustworthy; • Both energies combine well : 2's pride with 6's fear makes an overall great friend; • Fear to be excluded, outside of the social circle, even if not dominant social instinct; • Anxious to be of service, may create opportunities to help; • May be clingy and dependent.

2 + 7 Line (127, 278, 279) The Jovialist • Double positive outlook; • Very sociable and gregarious; • Natural entertainer, likes to laugh; • Possess natural charm and humor to entice people; • Bored and anxious when alone, needs the crowd to be stimulated; • 2w3 are often paired with this fix; • Looks SP or Extroverted Feeling (MBTI) even if not; • Doesn't like negativity at all; • Could help being a little more realistic about facing their problems.

2 + 8 Line (258, 268, 278) The Protector • Enhances the natural 2/8 line; • Double rejection; • Help people in a forceful, direct approach; • Very sensitive to being ignored or rejected; • "I know what's better for you than you do, so lemme help!"; • Most protective combination of all; • Can get very angry quickly, then apologize in fear of being unloved; • Mama/papa bear archetype.

2 + 9 Line (259, 269, 279) The Benevolent • Double positive outlook; • Soft, healing quality; • Dreamy, yet also focused on others; • Quiet presence but often ready to comfort with positive words; • Unassertive, may not know how to deal with negativity; • If core 2, softens a lot of the pride edges and may be blind to it; • If self-preservation dominant, may show their love with practical tasks (cooking, chores, etc.); • Very humble combination; • If sexual dominant, may become the supportive wife or husband, fusing with their mate.

3 + 5 Line (135, 358, 359) The Professional • Double competent; • Like to be known for their technical expertise; • Assumed image of a know-it-all, the game trivia nightmare; • Gives a core 5 more versatility and confidence to show what they're made of; • Productive, yet work at their own pace, may be procrastinator (especially with 359); • May run the risk of becoming robotic and unemotional; • See feelings ask inconsequential and a lack of time (less apparent with dominant sexual instinct or 4 wing); • Conceal their true identity, shapeshifters; • Very often Thinking types in MBTI.

3 + 6 Line (136, 368, 369) The Dutiful • Enhances the natural 3/6 line; • Double Attachment; • Very loyal and productive; • They often act for the greater good of their community or partner(s); • Like to show their loyalty and love through concrete actions; • Anxious if the authority question their value or their work; • Can become competitive in order to please the thing that gives them security (bosses, parents, partners, etc.); • Can adapt their speech and mannerism in order to conform better to their surroundings; • May question authority behind its back but support and perform in front of them.

3 + 7 Line (137, 378, 379) The Persuader • Double assertive; • Very positive combination; • Charming but a bit pushy in their demeanor; • Combine efficiency with entertainment : life is a game; • Like to promote the image of a successful, happy person; • May look fake and trying too much; • Like to submit innovative and original ideas to problems; • May follow rules, but prefer to make a colorful impact; • Don't have time for negativity or dealing with psychological problems.

3 + 8 Line (358, 368, 378) The Challenger • Double assertive; • Very competitive and aggressive; • "There's nothing I can't do, just watch me" • A Fighter archetype, don't give up easily; • May show an image of invulnerability at all times; • "No, you got a problem, no me!" • Hard to let things go and let their emotions speak; • May have an overwhelming presence; • Absolutely hates to lose; very strong egotistical stance.

3 + 9 Line (359, 369, 379) The Stabilizer • Enhances the natural 3/9 line; • Double attachment; • "Yeah, no worries, I can do that"; "Let me handle this"; • Steady, productive presence; • Very adaptable and accommodating; • Are efficient but don't usually push themselves further than what's expected of them; • Can pride themselves in being tolerant, uncomplicated and agreeable; • Unemotional, dry personality; • Hide their stubbornness by only adapting in surface and doing superficial changes.

4 + 5 Node (145, 458, 459) The Introspective • Enhances the natural wings of 4 and 5; • Deep thinker and feeler; • Very introverted and private; • Feel tired quickly when they in unfamiliar events; low energy overall; • Slow to commit to new habits and persons; • Generally prefer written communication to spoken one; • Great capacity to pursue their passions and interests; • Dislike changes in environment; • They have a hard time communicating their feelings to people (a little less if dominant social instinct);

4 + 6 Line (146, 468, 469) The Sensitive Soul • Double reactive; • Take a great deal of time analyzing and sorting out their feelings and thoughts; • Anxious about their identity, about what to trust; • Most emotionally sensitive and reactive combination; • Conflict between external security and maintaining personal identity; • "Can I trust him/her?"; "I feel so vulnerable"; • When they engage into something, they always have doubts ("Is this for me?", "Will I be able to do it?") • Creative, but need reassurance in their abilities and support from others; • Can be very volatile and explosive is they feel threatened.

4 + 7 Line (147, 478, 479) The Whimsical • Double frustration; • Very idealistic but with unstable energy; • Want significance and playfulness in their work; • Very creative and imaginative, dreamy personality; • Capricious and a bit of a brat; wants this done their way; • Sadness in hidden behind impish or childlike behavior; • Bipolar/dysthymic mind; oscillate between sadness and joy; • Often easily bored; • See things that are missing in order for the situation to be magical and original.

4 + 8 Line (458, 468, 478) The Maskless • Double reactive; • Very intense character regardless of the dominant instinct; • Reject inauthentic behavior; • Feel things strongly and express them in a powerful way (especially 468); • Protect the vulnerable, the rejected, the abandoned (especially with dominant social instinct); • Often provocative and defying taboos; • Likes to dig deep into emotional traumas (especially 458); • With core 8, gives an incentive to look into their vulnerable side; • With core 4, pushes them to act upon what they believe.

4 + 9 Line (459, 469, 479) The Receptive • Double withdrawn; • Hide their sadness with a smile; • The 9 fix erodes the melancholic side of 4, making it less jarring; • The 4 fix encourages the core 9 to look into their emotional side; • Ghostly, wispy demeanor; • Very passive and often unassuming; • Good listener, but may focus too much on the sad/emotional part of the conversation; • Very sensitive to painful experiences, retreat when feeling hurt; • Can be critical, but hide their comments from the public eye.

5 + 8 Line (258, 358, 458) The Independent • Double rejection; • Enhances the natural 5/8 line; • Strategic thinking; • Can act behind-the-scenes in a surprising way; Almost ninja-like; • Silently watchful and ready to act in accordance to plan; • Mix of hot and cold energy; may be hard to follow and hard to know; • Often have a razor-sharp mind and are very good at problem-solving; • Have a difficult time connecting with others in a casual, superficial way; • Menacing presence even if unintentional (especially with core 8).

5 + 9 Line (259, 359, 459) The Observer • Double withdrawn; • Aloof and detached personality; • Like to take their time to understand things their own way; • Like their peace and quiet time in order to recharge; • Usually very intelligent, may have a hard time voicing up their opinions; • Can be very quiet, but also very talkative when talking about something they like; • When they not agree with something, they may become argumentative but often give up; • Very observant and curious about a plethora of things; • Almost always introverted MBTI type.

6 + 8 Line (268, 368, 468) The Fighter • Double reactive; • Most confrontational combination (most aggressive tritype is 368); • Want to see the truth in all situation; • Often smell something fishy that others might not detect; • Very sensitive to power dynamics (personal and social); • Argumentative and emotional even in less dramatic situations; • May see problems where they aren't, a bit paranoiac; • Very protective about what they trust and believe into; • Like to know what they're going into.

6 + 9 Line (269, 369, 469) The Follower • Double attachment; • Often unassuming when alone, feel better in groups; • Feel harmony and contentment when in a familiar environment with their peers; • Unsure about their capacity to act alone, so they side with security; • Loyal and gentle with who they know and love; Aloof and anxious about the unknown; • The 9 fix helps the core 6 relax and being more tolerant and accepting of difference; • The 6 fix helps the core 9 being less indolent and more proactive when helping others; • Usually gentle and amiable, but can become secretive and anxious if they feel threatened; • Their biggest weakness is to act and think by themselves when necessary.

7 + 8 Node (278, 378, 478) The Conqueror • Double assertive; • Enhances the natural wings of 7 and 8; • Life is a playground; "I take what I want"; • Natural hedonistic and realistic approach to life; • May take for granted what others find offensive and obnoxious; • Good negotiator; Always find a way to win something; • Quick thinker and smooth talker; direct speech but in a funny, original way; • Hate limits and regulations, to the point of circumventing or breaking rules in order to get what they want; • Have a hard time to slow down and think about the consequences at first.

7 + 9 Line (279, 379, 479) The Optimist • Double positive outlook; • Gentle and ethereal; • May be a bit out of touch with reality; • Always have a alternate positive view of even bad or tragic events; • Soft, expansive energy, always dreaming about what could be; • Often have a lazy side that don't want to deal with boring or serious tasks; • Most prone to have symptoms of Attention Deficit Disorder of all the combinations; • Create their own rosy bubble when dreary times arise; • May run the risk of being too positive and unfocused on taking real action.

[sarkos]

Shortly before he died in 2007, the celebrated American novelist, iconoclast and second world war veteran Kurt Vonnegut gave a final interview. “My country is in ruins,” he said. “I’m a fish in a poisoned fishbowl.” Vonnegut was 84, and sounded razor sharp as he spoke about inequality and political shortsightedness, adding that in the history of the United States “one thing that no cabinet has ever had is a Secretary of the Future, and there are no plans at all for my children and grandchildren.” “Why should I care about future generations?” asked the comedian Groucho Marx. “What have they ever done for me?” “The Department of the Future would set in motion a realignment of priorities in all aspects of society,” proposes geology professor Marcia Bjornerud in her compelling book Timefulness. “Resource conservation would again become a core value and patriotic virtue. Tax incentives and subsidies would be rebalanced to reward long-term stewardship over short-term exploitation.” By encouraging higher education and imposing sensible regulations, a Department of the Future would help to incentivize a deeper morality than greed and a preoccupation with Now. Composed of scientists, humanists, historians and Indigenous elders, it would beckon us to climb a higher peak than the Mountain of More. It would end, or at least mitigate, what the author and activist Naomi Klein calls the “intergenerational theft” of anthropogenic climate change, and in its place blueprint a green energy revolution and regeneration that makes fossil fuels obsolete.

Why we need a Department of the Future | Kim Heacox | The Guardian

[chrisengel]

The Still Small Voice: Psychoanalytic Reflections on Guilt and Conscience

Donald L. Carveth

Whereas Freud himself viewed conscience as one of the functions of the superego, in The Still Small Voice: Psychoanalytic Reflections on Guilt and Conscience Carveth argues that superego and conscience are distinct mental functions and that, therefore, a fourth mental structure, the conscience, needs to be added to the psychoanalytic structural theory of the mind. He claims that while both conscience and superego originate in the so-called pre-oedipal phase of infant and child development, they are comprised of contrasting and often conflicting identifications. The primary object, still most often the mother, is inevitably experienced as, on the one hand, nurturing and soothing and, on the other, as frustrating and persecuting. Conscience is formed in identification with the nurturer; the superego in identification with the aggressor. There is a principle of reciprocity at work in the human psyche: for love received one seeks to return love; for hate, hate (the talion law). Like Franz Alexander and Sandor Ferenczi before him, Carveth views the therapeutic task as the disempowerment of the superego. But unlike his forebears he does not propose its replacement by the rational ego for, in his view, rationality cannot serve as the source of values. Following Jean-Jacques Rousseau, he finds the roots of morality not in reason but in feeling, in sympathetic identification or “pity.” With Pascal, he holds that “the heart has reasons reason cannot know.” Such “reasons of the heart” form the core of conscience. Unlike the torments inflicted by the demonic superego that merely uses transgression as an excuse to do what it wants―punish and torment the ego―the conscience, what Winnicott called “the capacity for concern,” is genuinely troubled by failures to love. The author claims we must face our bad conscience, acknowledge and bear genuine (depressive) guilt, and through contrition, repentance and reparation come to accept reconciliation and forgiveness, or be forced to suffer the torments of the damned―persecutory guilt inflicted by the sadistic internal persecutor and saboteur, the superego. It is the author’s view that in human history the damage done by id-driven psychopaths amounts to nothing compared to that brought about by superego-driven ideologists. Freud and subsequent psychoanalysis has largely whitewashed the superego while demonizing the id, the alleged “beast” in man, when in reality animals are seldom beastly, at least not in the ways humans often are. While aware of its destructiveness in the clinical realm, psychoanalysts have largely ignored the ideologies of domination―the sexism, racism, heterosexism, classism and childism―that are internalized from unconscionable societies into the unconscionable superego.In the penultimate chapter, drawing on the work of Hannah Arendt, Terry Eagleton and others, Carveth critically reviews the concepts of psychopathy and evil. In the final chapter, he advocates a demythologizing, deliteralizing or deconstructive approach to the Bible as metaphor, but one that escapes Freud’s derogation of this approach by acknowledging, with Hegel at his most honest, that its result is a humanistic ethic no longer to be equated with religion.

Categories: Society, Politics & Philosophy - Anthropology Year: 2013 Publisher: Karnac Books Language: English Pages: 360 / 353 ISBN 10: 1780491689 ISBN 13: 9781780491684 File: PDF, 1.01 MB

[incurablehumanist]

Humanism and SPN: a match made...on Earth?

so i think it’s time i explained this blog’s whole idk theme. it’s raison d’etre, if you wanna get fancy abt it. like, it’s prolly pretty obvious (it’s literally in the name) but i still wanna break it down and make sure people really get where i’m coming from. this is also something i wanna talk abt a lot during my Great Rewatch so i think it would help to have something to refer back to when this topic inevitably comes up in future. let’s dive in, shall we?

despite Supernatural being a show about, obviously, the supernatural, I wholly believe that it is, at it’s core, a story about Humanism (the philosophy). or it’s a show based on the same foundations as Humanism (the philosophy). or it’s just very, very, Humanism (the philosophy) friendly. either way, as a humanist it gives me ALL the feels and I really, desperately want to talk about it, so that’s what i’m gonna do!

to get specific, I’m talking about modern Humanist philosophy, frequently referred to as “secular humanism”. you can find a good overview of what that means on the American Humanist Association’s website, especially their 3 Humanist Manifestos (available to read here, here, and here. the last of those is the current manifesto as accepted by the AHA, but all of them provide good context of what Humanism means as a whole). this is as opposed to Renaissance or Religious Humanism, which have notable differences, though tbh a case could be made for religious humanism bc of the whole “god is canonically real in SPN” thing. When I talk about Humanism though I’m almost always gonna be talking abt modern “secular” Humanism. also i can literally never decide whether humanism should be capitalized or not so expect lots of waffling on that. now tbh I'm not super educated on Humanism as a philosophy beyond the manifestos and what can be found with a cursory google search, so I'm gonna be learning more abt it as I go, but i understand it enough (and have considered myself a secular humanist for long enough) to have Opinions. I’m hoping that as I examine the show through this lens i’ll both gain a better understanding of Humanism as a philosophy as well as how supernatural relates to it. no promises that anything good or coherent will come of it but I'm excited to see where it leads me! also if you too have Opinions on this topic I would absolutely looooooooove to hear them. seriously. hit me up. finally, for context, i’m gonna include some quotes about Humanism which I think best exemplify its ideology and will hopefully give people unfamiliar with it an idea of where I'm coming from/why I think SPN is such a perfect representation of it. I also highly recommend reading the manifestos on AHA's website, since they’re basically the horse’s mouth when it comes to the modern (Western) Humanism movement. beyond it’s relevance to SPN as a narrative, it’s also just a beautiful perspective on life, and it always makes me happy to read about it. like you’re about to do right now! here we go: "While there is much that we do not know, humans are responsible for what we are or will become. No deity will save us; we must save ourselves." – Humanist Manifesto II (1973) "Humanism is the light of my life and the fire in my soul. It is the deep felt conviction, in every fiber of my being that human love is a power far transcending the relentless, onward rush of our largely deterministic cosmos. All human life must seek a reason for existence within the bounds of an uncaring physical world, and it is love coupled with empathy, democracy, and a commitment to selfless service which undergirds the faith of a humanist." – Bette Chambers, former president of the AHA "Humanism is an approach to life which encourages ethical and fulfilling living on the basis of reason and humanity, and rejects superstition and religion. The most immediate impact of living as a Humanist is that we believe this life is all there is - so what we do and the choices we make really count." – Stephen Fry "Humanists recognize that it is only when people feel free to think for themselves, using reason as their guide, that they are best capable of developing values that succeed in satisfying human needs and serving human interests." – Isaac Asimov "Does religion fill a much needed gap? It is often said that there is a God-shaped gap in the brain which needs to be filled: we have a psychological need for God -- imaginary friend, father, big brother, confessor, confidant -- and the need has to be satisfied whether God really exists or not. But could it be that God clutters up a gap that we'd be better off filling with something else? Science, perhaps? Art? Human friendship? Humanism? Love of this life in the real world, giving no credence to other lives beyond the grave?" – Richard Dawkins "There is nothing new about humanism. It is the yielding to Satan's first temptation of Adam and Eve: "Ye shall be as gods." (Gen. 3:5)" – Billy Graham, Christian evangelist (lol)