Humanistic Behaviorism

Competition and cooperation in fairly equal measure both serve to advance our understanding of this experience we call 'life'.

@Fraggle

Though the term 'self actualization' is a fairly new one, I'm rather inclined to think that our early ancestors also experienced this when one considers that many of the artifacts unearthed are not purely utilitarian in nature. No way of knowing for a fact though....

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Self-actualization is the ultimate goal in Maslow's theory, but not everyone is interested in getting that goal because they have a different scale of values ​and therefore different supreme value. For example: money, fitness, jewelries, real estate, etc.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Yes we lost about a day of posts due to a system anomaly.

Pleased to make your -uh- pseudo-aquaintance. I mean, pleased to pretend to meet you. Oops. Uh, pleased to pick up where we left off.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

You manage English better than many folks here who speak it as a first language.

I think there was an issue about the psychological connection you made to homosexuality. The standards used for norms in ideas, thoughts and behaviors have changed. The field of Psychology has had to readjust the older statistics to remove this bias.

The word "bestiality": I wondered if you were thinking in Spanish when you said this. After all we are animals. Eating the flesh of other animals, having all the bodily functions of animals, and experiencing animal urges with regard to hunger, to be satiated, whether in food, drink, sex, rock 'n roll (or opera), or even the urge to either belong to the pack or to dominate it--these are fairly well accepted among pedestrians as part of the normal life. I wouldn't think that occasional "wild-animal" urges and behaviors are off the norm, and indeed, depending on how you look at it, all of these categories may be engaged in the "animal" manner, yet the actor may suffer no harmful mental effects -- I would think. Obviously there are cases in which people go way too far, and these we tend to think of as mentally imbalanced.

Living in the Dominican Republic, with history of Roman Catholic affiliation: would you say that this has influenced you or perhaps even caused you some bias? How do you reply to the American psychologists who have accommodated homosexuality as a normative alternative to heterosexuality?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Erikson’s stages of development are similar, but I doubt that certain stages have to be completed before other stages can be reached, nor are they as age specific as he suggests. Unlike Erikson, Rogers didn’t put forward stages of development. He considered genetic determinants, but focused on strong environmental influence that have a tendency to impede, or facilitate self-actualization.

Although, this new pyramid already has generated some controversy within the field. I was glad that self-actualization no longer appeared on the pyramid at all. Maslow included spirituality in his drive towards self-actualization. I am an atheist so it never sat well with me.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Even though spirituality in transpersonal psychology differs from belief or participation in organized religion. Maslow maintained that people are born with the need for spiritual and transcendent experiences. Psychology tries to emulate science such as physics by focusing on objective empirical data. Reality is not wholly determined internally. Self-actualization draws upon spirituality, focusing on ego states that allow you to hide behind the pseudo-intellectual jargon, in other words, spiritual pseudoscience.

Reaching for your idealized-self to achieve self-actualization that is vulnerable to social factors, which influences the concept of who we think we should be, does not scream out elitism to me. There is so much information that we are consciously unaware of at all times. How in the hell would we even know if we have become a so-called self-actualized individual. We are all subject to numerous cognitive biases. Although, they may be necessary because if we perceived all the positive and negative information about ourselves accurately, we would be less happy, less caring, and less productive. I grew up with all this hocus-pocus and thankfully, the need for regard from others diminishes as we age.

[video=youtube;8Biv_8xjj8E]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Biv_8xjj8E[/video]

 

I think you ran a bit wild with your conclusion there. While I won't claim to understand the OP exactly. I think it is a bit unfair to jump to wild conclusions without asking for clarification. Also, while I know generally we define beastiality as sex with animals, some people may consider behaving as a beast during sex to qualify. I think more clarification is needed here. The op at the very least has me curious about what the intentions of the post are and what point was he trying to put forth.

ETA: I apologize for replying to an early post so late in the discussion.

 

Especially given the possible crossover into Spanish that Sibilia's bilingual mind may make. He may have meant "brutish" or some other nuance. I myself am curious what Sibilia actually meant. By having such an excellent command of English, it's possible that he meant something else, whereas it was assumed to be literal English, not an alternative Spanish meaning, which can convey something quite different than sexual gratification with an animal.

 

Muchas gracias. By the way Aqueous, where are you from?

I had written that although men and women are socially equal, naturally they are different: man gets a woman pregnant and woman gets pregnant. There is a father and a mother.

Bestiality is perversion, brutality, sodomy.

I had also written, during the system problem, that I was evangelical and I keep some beliefs.

 

In my own words, spirituality doesn't necessarily include God. Spirituality is a practice of reflection that seeks the self-knowledge.

The system again, I wrote that social sciences use their own methods: poll, controlled observation and interview.

I'll watch the video later.

 

This is mostly off topic but the spelling of bestiality threw me off a bit. I always have seen it spelled beastiality. but according to the little red squiggly line and several online dictionaries apparently it is spelled bestiality, which I have always jokingly pronounced with a short e as in the word best. Then a little play on words, besties- playfun term for best friends, so I defined bestiality, quite in error, as (best e ality) sex with one's bestie or best friend. Of course I guess now that I realize the correct spelling of the words if one's best friend is an animal, I would still be correct. but its not at all what I had in mind.:/

 

This was the message #50.

Don't worry about it.

 

Whoever he is, to support homosexuality it's going against moral principles. Man is a rational and moral animal.

 

While I don't disagree that most humans observe and follow some brand of morality, I am surprised that someone in your field would see morality as something absolute. In the days of the old testament, using Christianity as the source of morality for this particular example, it was quite common accepted state of morality to make blood sacrifices to God. Today, in most of the western world that still practices Christianity, the idea of sacrificing an animal as a religious ritual is seen as demonic from a religious standpoint and immoral due to the cruelty done to the animal.

Morality is subjective. What is morally correct to one individual is morally incorrect to another, even among practitioners of the same faith. Since morality is subjective, I don't see how you can use morality as a litmus paper in any scientific approach to labeling what is bestial or perversion and what is not.

I think the psychologists of today generally do not include homosexuality as deviant or perverted sexual behavior. And if you do this, you are doing your patients/clients a disservice. I also do not think mainstream psychologists or psychiatrists deal in morality. They leave that to clerics because human brain function and thought operate the same with or without religious definitions of what is and isn't moral. This is just my opinion and I fear I haven't stated what I mean to say clearly enough but maybe the right questions will be asked that can help lead me to the better way of expressing them. I'll take this chance.

 

Old Testament dogmas have their weakness, Christ created the New Testament that abolished many of the Old Testament principles.

That's correct as long as no one gets hurt physically and psychologically. There are some people who are masochists, that's good for them. A Muslim blows himself up killing many people.

I respect your opinion which is correct. Smoking is injurious to health and there are doctors who smoke. Smoke doctors do.

AIDS is a homosexuality consequence.

 

Oh my god! It’s spread more through heterosexual transmission. Can someone please translate one of his videos so we can get an idea of what we’re dealing with? Is he saying something about duality and becoming time? What in the hell? :bugeye:

[video=youtube;7UIrM1UwVdw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7UIrM1UwVdw[/video]

Oh, I found his blog THE FILOCRONIA: the new metaphysics

Lame...:crazy:

 

You don't have to go so far, right here I have started some threads: BECOMING-TIME DUALITY: http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?113416-Duality-becoming-time&highlight=

THE POWER OF INTUITION: http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?115116-The-Power-of-Intuition&highlight=

 

Well, now I know why Crunchy Cat asked, “Why is this pseudo crap in a science subforum?”

 

hahahaha. Are your arguments finished? It's hard to accept the truth.

 

Obviously.

 

Over and out.