The hero’s journey has interested me for some years now, this interest started with Joseph Campbell and then seeing the Myth patterns in movies. To see the Hero’s Journey play out in real life is quite a thing to behold. Moreover, when one sees the pattern once, the pattern becomes easier to see the next time. In a movie, the Hero’s Journey follows a threefold pattern with distinct transitions, and some directors try to make each scene mirror the same threefold pattern. In a nut shell this threefold pattern is; 1) the hero is in their ordinary world. 2) Enters a special world. 3) Comes back to the ordinary world.
We need to first look at the theory of the Hero’s Journey before I can illustrate how it shows up in real life and how you can see yourself as the Hero in your journey of life, because, you are the central character in your life’s story and thus that Hero. The threefold pattern has within it distinct moments or events that break the three parts up into more descript sections of the story.
In the ordinary world:
1) The hero is introduced to the story.
2) The hero is called to an adventure.
To read the entire Posting please pay $5.50 Via PayPay. Add to cart and then you will see the Shopping cart on the top of the Left hand Menu. Then I will email the password to you for the entire posting.
Follow me on Twitter
I have been playing around.
Now you can follow this Blog on Twitter.
New posts will be automatically notified on Twitter.
You may have heard in the movie “Men in Black” the quote “individuals are smart, bout people are stupid and irrational”. This is a true enough statement, because we each have the propensity to polarise our decisions when we are in a groups. Ok, now in English. We all have the capability of making moderate decisions when we are left to make a decision on our own. So be for we make a decision by our-self we want to know the facts to a point then our emotions give us the signal that it is the right thing to do and then the decision in made and thus act upon it. But in a group setting we are more than likely to go with the majority of people, and we are faster to come to a conclusion because we rely on the group and not on the facts. This is as if group power is more influential on us than the facts are. When people are in a group we do save cognitive energy (thinking power) by relying of other peoples’ opinions and think that they have searched for the facts. Then on top of all this, it depends who has the better argument and the most dominant person has sway in the point influencing our decisions.
Let’s look at different levels of society, both in the grasp of Group think.
McCarthyism is a good example of Group think by being led by a person and a policy. In the 1940s and 50 the witch hunt for communists draw America into a frenzy of persecution of everything associated with communism. Thus as the fervour took over the popular belief, individuals in politics found that enhancements in their career will come by following the frenzy and find more individuals to persecute. Soon the general population will join in. Just as a snow ball grows, as it rolls downhill the fervour grows in strength. Committees were established, and investigation boards were in action to find and even route out individuals that have infiltrated larger organisations. Guilty or not these people were displayed publicly as communists, black balled by unions, and publicly humiliated. McCarthyism is not new, and has been repeated in many small ways and some large ways.
We can see in action today with the fervour to save the environment at the expense of the people and the environment. There is a town here in Australia that was once desolate, with only sparse bush land before being settled over 100 years ago. Now with the help of the people irrigating the land and drawing the needed water from a river nearby. Now in the wisdom of policy and the fervour of environmentalism, the government wants to stop all irrigation of the land to “save the river”, thus the food basket of the state will revert back to its original dust bowl. (this information was drawn from interviews that a radio host, Allan Jones did).
I remember years ago, I went to church, and the preacher announced that the Smurfs are the creation of the devil, and that the Smurfs are devises to lead the children astray. For one month all the people that attended bar some, sold or dumped anything that had to do with the Smurfs. Each house went through the cleansing of the Smurfs out of their house. All the small figures, towels, bed spreads, and lunch boxes were disposed of. A month later the leader of the church came back from a conference and announced that the past paster was incorrect in their assumption, and the Smurfs were not devil driven. This event shows us some things. Firstly, when the leader of the church was away, the person that took over was trying to gain favour with the leader by implementing this new idea (Semmelhack & Ende, 2008, p. 6) that Smurfs are evil. Secondly, that a group of people can have irrational thoughts derived from a leader and enhanced by the group (Semmelhack & Ende, 2008, p. 6). Finally the leader can be seen as a deity, for each member to have their problems solved for them, and give nourishment (Semmelhack & Ende, 2008).
Bion (Semmelhack & Ende, 2008, p. 5) describes that “groups could be understood only in terms of the psychotic processes” that have been established in early development. Without going in to the psychoanalytical explanation of how the individual develops into society. In short and with my understanding, the child is attached to their parent and then later in life tries to adopt a social group as a substitute parent, thus adopting all the group’s ideas, even the absurd ideas. Though this is but one theory of the individual within the dynamics of a group, another is that there is a flux between the feeling of freedom and deindividuation.
To explain this further you may need to do some active reflections of your own. When a person first enters a group the feeling of freedom is realised and that person feels that they have more autonomy. As time progresses, in a very short period being an individual transforms in to deindividuation. Deindividuation is the deep immersion into a group, where the individual is not seen as separate from the group and the distinction is lost. The individual holds the beliefs of the group and the group holds the individual. If the individual is taken away from the group and recount the actions they did when in the group, the individual would not have, in normal circumstances do the things that they have done.
There is also an example just recently of mass hysteria in people being exposed to a celebrity when in a group. There was one instance where a young person was overwhelmed by a celebrity speaking to her, although when asked who that person that they spoke to was, they had no idea. Likewise watching a popular ban on TV has very little emotional impact on a person, but when they go to a live concert people are sucked or influenced in by the mass of op people.
The dynamics within a group will not be talked about here, because there is a lot to discuss. Though just for now we can see that the energy of the group can, has, and does take over the individuals will, with the individual doing things that they would not otherwise do.
Have you got a story to tell that is along the lines of Group Think?
Semmelhack, D., & Ende, L. (2008). The psychotic elements in everyday group think. Retrieved 12 08, 2010, from Radical Psychology: a journal of psychology, polotics and randicalism: http://www.radicalpsychology.org/vol17-1/semmel.html
body scans
I have been asked to write about embarrassment and the psychological impact of being physically searched at the air port before getting on an aircraft. At first I had one idea about why people do comply and why others do not comply with these conditions. I began with the idea that people do allow them-selves to be patted down because they either agree with the policy and/or they do not wish to be the odd man out (so to speak). Additionally the people that refuse to comply wish to make a public statement about the policy. Thus I shall now attempt to answer this request by drawing parallels from other forms of obedience and conformity sources.
We will firstly discuss embarrassment. This may at first sound counter intuitive, you may first think that being patted down at the airport as being a source of embarrassment, but latter I will elaborate this with cognitive dissonance. Within society the use of embarrassment is an incredibly strong form or socialisation, conformity, and acceptance. People avoid stepping out of line with the rest of society because it may bring them embarrassment, thus we try to anticipate others actions to avoid embarrassment (Sutherland, 2008, pp. 51-52). We may think that we have a freedom of choice, but in reality choices diminish when we take cues from our surrounding environment by observing others (Sutherland, 2008, p. 51). Sutherland (2008, p. 51) calls this the bandwagon effect, forinstance, we “continue to drink bottled water on the streets, in the gyms, even in the movies” because others are doing it, thus we do it. Another reason for conformaty is due to feelings of insecurity, “people conform most when they are insecure” (Sutherland, 2008, p. 51). Thus drawing a conclusion, when people are traveling, they are away from their comfort zone and feel insecure, wish to save them-selves embarrassment, thus conform to being scanned and/or padded down by strangers in a uniform in the airport.
The assosiation with people in an embarressing moment is likewise a strong motivation for people not to be on the side of a person that is being placed in an embarrassing situation (Sutherland, 2008, p. 136). From childhood onward we wish to have a positive self-image, thus we wish to identify with “attractive roles, not the embarrassing ones … has-beens, the losers or the naive” (Sutherland, 2008, p. 136). It is far easier to illustrate the opposite in society, next time you walk down the street or go to the library, look at how many people have laptops. These are the people that wish to be publicly associated with business, intelligence, and productivity, in short they are showing off their worth and self-image. So to a brand symbols become an influence of expressing self-identity. And it is with a strong self-image we protect our-selves trough intolerance, because we try to preserve our-selves from emotional overwhelming, embarrassment or a self-threatening encounter where our beliefs of physical being is in threat.
The power of embarrassment is so strong that we use it knowingly or unknowingly in verbal aggression. In order to attack someone verbally we need to look at the arsenal that we use. To create psychological pain in others we need to attack their self-image or in other words their self-concepts (Infante, 2005, p. 192). Infante (2005, p. 192) pionts to humiliation, embarrasment, and other forms of instilling negative feelings about the self as key to attacking the global trate of a person. The global trates that are attact are their character,competence, or physical appearance (Infante, 2005, p. 192). This can be seen demonstrated in society with some people that break the law, through “name and shame” activities of the media. Thus people do not do those activities highlighted in the media due to the “name and shame” policies or find better ways of concealment.
Cognitive dissonance is about you internal moral compass, it is a psychological term that describes the uncomfortable feeling one gets when going against a moral decision or a decision about how much risk you are placing upon yourself when doing something out of the norm. Thus it is an unpleasant internal state when we attempt to hold incompatible thoughts or our actions are incompatible with our moral compass (Johnson & Ridley, 2008, p. 4). Cognitive dissonance can be seen as a measuring stick, if the cognitive dissonance is small then it is easy to go against your pre-established convictions. For example, I have a self-concept that “I do not lie”, but I do lie from time to time; you know those small white lies. Additionally, if cognitive dissonance is high, it will take the threat of death to make me do something. Taking the medium measurement of cognitive dissonance to get a person to comply or to have obedience to a policy, that person must be faced with a harder alternative as a consequence. Now let’s put that into perspective with airport security and body scanning and physical searches.
So to recap, humans desire social inclusion and do not wish to be in any type of embarrassment. Secondly we are more inclined to obey when we feel insecure. And finally we do things we do not wish to do because the alternative consequence is less favourable. So to answer the question why do we let our liberties be eroded by authorities by permitting body scanning and physical pat-downs?
To answer this question. Firstly we feel insecure and on our own when travelling, thus we comply with demands from authorities. Secondly, we do not wish to stand out from the crowd to feel embarrassed so we comply. And finally the feeling of embarrassment is stronger that standing up for your rights. So the answer to how to regain sanity in a system out of control is; Firstly to travel with a cohort (friends) with the same moral compass. And finally be prepared to be embarrassed and put on display.
- Infante, D. A. (2005). Corporal punishment of children: A communication – Theory perspctive. In M. Donnelly, & M. A. Straus (Eds.), Corporal punishment of children in theoretical perspective (pp. 183-198). London: Yale University Press.
- Johnson, W. B., & Ridley, C. R. (2008). The elements of ethics for professionals. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
- Sutherland, M. (2008). Advertising and the mind of the consumer: What works, what doesn’t, and why (3rd ed.). Crows Nest, Australia: Allen and Unwin.
Man-In-A-Strait-Jacket
In most of the article and books that I have read, they describe self-esteem as a self generating behaviour. Furthermore these books and articles describe how self-esteem is manifest in cognition and how self-talk controls our behaviour and the views we have about our self. I know I have picked a big subject here and will not be able to hit it all in one shot. But I will give it a go.
We define our self via external authorities, such as our parents, teachers, and peer group, I would also include the legal system and the media, thus creating self-esteem (Magaro & Ashbrook, 1985). Self-esteem is the confidence, satisfaction, or value we have in our self. Thus we have it in a nutshell. But let’s expand on this.
When we, as children and now in anger or frustration we use name calling to bring a person into disrepute, by picking on the person’s physical appearance, mental ability, character, behaviour, beliefs, sexuality and social relations (Allan & Burridge, 2006, p. 79). The entire name calling that we use is thus targeting the recipient to belittle and shame them. We are creatures that have versatile communication, and use it in all forms of activity and to inflict pain. It is with associating a person with something that has an established stigma in society we attempt to cause harm to that person directly or cause an effect in the social group to create a stigma surrounding that person, thus guilty by association. Thus we use a stigma that is associated with one of those categories I have listed to illustrate that the target person also has the same characteristics. For example, mental ability “you are an idiot and good for nothing”. Thus the association between the self (you) and the stigma (idiot) is formed and highlighted by behaviour for the present and in a prediction for the future (good for nothing). Thus by calling a person a name in this fashion the targets confidence and self value is eroded thus confidence in one’s own ability is also drastically injured, and can take decades to recover.
Why did I say decades? Well a child has little if any psychological protection to protect them from such an attack, and takes it seriously. This psychological protection or emotional armour from harmful names is developed over time. Thus an attack on a child in this manner will have devastating affects in their self-view, self-value, self-esteem. So Teachers and Parents, Take note of this.
In our western culture it is assumed that individuals have self-maintenance strategies to drive one to self-enhancement (self-talk) so to lift our self-esteem (Miller & Schaberg, 2003, p. 45). One of these strategies is to distance ourselves in early adulthood onwards from anything that has a cultural low value that may harm us. One way this happens is by avoiding buildings that indicate to others that we have problems in some way. For example I did a six week workshop for a job network for those that are between jobs at the moment, and many did not like coming to that building because it showed others that they are currently unemployed. Likewise, people avoid going to an office that have counsellors and psychologists in the building because of the negative association (stigma) it has in the community. Thus we try to protect out self-esteem by not getting help when we need it, due to the name calling that occurs as children. I remember some of the taunts that went around the playground when I was young, such as spazz, mental case, moron, dope, and FITH (F***ed In The Head).
I have heard many in my care say that one negative judgment from a loved one has more meaning to them than one thousand positive comments from friends, work colleagues, or strangers. With the erosion of confidence the behaviour that is thus displayed is a self-fulfilling prophecy to act it the way they are judged. For instance, if a person is told that they are stupid, they will not attempt to learn, and pick subjects or jobs that use more motor skills and physical activities.
These negative comments from others then turn into negative self-talk. Self-talk are quick and automatic comments that are so fast that we often don’t even notice them our-self (Bourne, 2005, p. 162). The self-talk that we have created the feelings we have about the situation. Thus a situation occurs, which we must interpret and have a self-talk about, which leads to feelings and reactions (Bourne, 2005, p. 162). It is the negative self-talk that makes us avoid a situation or get us out of a situation (Bourne, 2005, p. 163). It has been described in the movie “Being in heaven” that if a child is told that they are no good at art work, they will avoid dating a person that is artistic, because it will bring up the same feelings of hopelessness as they did as a child when told that they are hopeless at art. Thus it is demonstrated that self-esteem is linked to stigma and self-talk. Also self-talk is a key point in cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) to combat anxiety (Bourne, 2005, pp. 163-164).
It is with this in mind that I started this service of counselling over skype so people do not need to go to any office or building to be treated for their issues. With the internet we are able to do all the work we would normally do in any office face to face. Furthermore you have the option to pull the plug when you feel like it without having to get out any office. Thanks to school I also have an aversion to offices, to the point that my heart rate rises and my hands get all sweaty.
- Allan, K., & Burridge, K. (2006). Forbidden words: Taboo and the censoring of language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Bourne, E. J. (2005). The anxiety & phobia workbook (4 ed.). Oakland: New Hardinger Publications, Inc.
- Magaro, P. A., & Ashbrook, R. M. (1985). The Personality of Societal Groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 48 (6), 1479-1489.
- Miller, J. G., & Schaberg, L. (2003). Cultural Perspectives on Personality and Social Psycholog. In Handbook of Psychology (Vol. 5, pp. 31-56). New Jersey: John Wiley & sons, Inc.
For a long time and especially during my studies I have found that many journal articles are Descriptive, neglecting the Prescriptive. I was sitting down flicking through a journal that was left on the desk, thinking this is for the medical profession, talking about medications and stuff. But then I saw the title “Difficult physician-patient encounters”. Mmmm was this going to talk about how to treat clients? Then reading the abstract … I thought, wow this is about telling Doctors how to treat clients when encounters are difficult.
As you know Doctors are renowned for being taught to be great diagnosticians, as seen in the movie “Patch Addams” with Robert Williams. Doctors are not portrayed to have great bed manners, or having good listening skills, or even having sensitivity when communicating news. Though Doctors are taught to deal with and treat people with personality disorders, drug dependence and mood disorders (Breen & Greenberg, 2010). Breen & Greenberg (2010) describes that during studies and in professional life there is little opportunity to develop communication skills, or to recognize, manage, and learn how to prevent those difficult physician-patient encounters. One suggestion that is described is to discuss these issues with colleagues when they occur.
The thing I like is that if there is a difficult communication with the client, the client is often regarded a “problematic” rather than the encounter as being difficult (Breen & Greenberg, 2010). For me, this tells of the direction of blame. If the client is “problematic” all the blame is placed on the client and perfection lays with the Doctor. However, when the encounter is difficult, then the blame is shared, and the Doctor is also partly responsible for the difficulties. Thus if the client is seen to be difficult, the Doctor / Therapist then seeks to avoid those “problematic” clients. Some of the distinct behaviours that Breen & Greenberg (2010) write about are the clients that are; demanding, needy, abusive, inflexible, argumentative, vexatious, overtly familiar, or flirtatious. But if the therapist is unhurried and the office is quiet, confidentiality and comfort is enhanced, then communication becomes much easier.
“Difficult encounters often reflect poor communication. As in all encounters, the first approach is to seek to establish rapport, demonstrate respect and build confidence and trust. … Effective communication helps us understand patients as whole persons, so that we can imagine ourselves in their situations (i.e. empathy) and better understand how they feel and why they might behave in certain ways.” (Breen & Greenberg, 2010)
When dealing with angry clients, taking the time to listen attentively to the concerns and acknowledge the anger or distress reduces the anger. As anger is a result of other reasons, eg, past experience with the health system, fear of diagnosis, or the expression of perceived guilt either in the client or other family members. I know this sound like common sense, but common sense is not all that common. I have seen, or been told of how the Doctor’s or therapist’s own stress in life comes out with clients or has not been properly dealt with before work start. Furthermore the behaviour that is shown by the professional is a feedback from the client and vice versa. Thus clients that treat the Dr with kindness and respect will get it in return. However clients are stuck in their own problems and do not think about others feelings because what they are going through is stressful for them. Thus a little give and take is needed.
Breen & Greenberg (2010) describes how the Royal Australasian College of Physicians (RACP) have a communication training program. Along with the description of a US training program based on personal awareness, teaching “insight into how one’s own life experiences and emotional make-up affect one’s interactions with patients” (Breen & Greenberg, 2010). This is commendable, but if you look at the intake of students into university, coming from one institution (school) into another institution (university). Thus the experience they have is of educational institutions and the interaction with friends. Though the programme that is in the US deals with; personal history, family and cultural backgrounds, values biases, attitudes and emotional “hot buttons” and how they affect the client in the way professionals treat them (Breen & Greenberg, 2010).
I liked reading this paper because to was looking at how professionals fall over their own feet when dealing with clients. Reading through the last couple of paragraphs it seems to me that it was written out of frustration that people in the CARE profession are not dealing with their own emotions professionally.
Breen, K. J., & Greenberg, P. G. (2010). Ethics in medicine – Aclinical perspective: Difficult physician-patient encounters. Internal Medicine Journal , 40, 682-688.
I have read that penguins have an interesting form of courtship. There are the incredibly noisy and ear piercing screeches that the male sings to the female, which can also be found in many birds. The penguin does not have an eye stunning dance that the male displays to their mate, unlike many other birds. But penguins have more in common with humans than most other birds. Of course some birds show of their plumage like men show of their cars and bikes, while other birds show their collection of wealthy trinkets like the Bower Bird, just as some people show off their homes.
But penguins are more like humans in their behaviour in their courtship and choice of partners. Male Penguins give gifts of small pebbles to their mate and entice the mate with fish that they have caught. This is a lot like humans, when we court, we give gifts of card, flowers, cute cuddly toys, and alike. This is like a form of currency, the currency of love. We do not see it as a form of purchasing affection, we say that it is affection, love, a thoughtful gift, a way of saying “I am thinking of you”. We can call it all we like, but a rose is but a rose even by any other name.
Males take their mate out for dinner of meat or sea food, very much like the humble penguin giving fish to their potential mate. The feeding or suppling of food to our potential mate is to show that we are good suppliers and to dazzle the mate with intelligent, funny, or romantic conversation, this sounds like ear aching noise to others. This too is the currency of love, by showing the potential partner, and saying with actions “you will never go hungry with me around”. But come on we are living in the age of equality, right? Males and females work now, don’t we?
In the penguin community, both male and female go fishing to feed the young. First the males go out to get food, while the female looks after the young, then visa versa. This happened in humanity for a while, until child care came along, if that’s what you wish to call it, getting strangers to bring up the kids. Unlike other animals that have the in-laws, brothers, sisters, aunts, uncles, cousins to help in the raising of the children, such as elephants, primates and some collective cultures. Penguins, however only care for their own children and care not for the kids of others, those kids are ignored and left out in the cold to die if they get lost. But penguins do look after their own children with great care. This is where the all the promises of courtship must hold up and the expenditure of the currency of love must pay off.
We humans need to keep the currency of love flowing all the time, the tokens of love that show our feelings and thoughts that are not tangible and cannot be shown without a device in behaviour. So unlike penguins we need to keep our partner’s interest in staying faithful for a common goal. This is difficult with all the distractions we need to traverse. Penguins don’t have too many distractions, but we do. We have the distractions of the pheromones, biological cycles, TV shows that tell us what a relationship looks like, magazines that show us what beauty is, and the friends that tells how our partner is no good. Oh I almost forgot, there are also those other educational movies that show us how wrong our nocturnal behaviour is being conducted. Penguins don’t have all these distractions, they only have 2 big distractions, firstly, don’t freeze to death, and secondly, don’t get eaten.
Now I will stray from the penguin’s, and concentrate more on the currency of love.
Because Love is a feeling and cannot be seen by others, besides the googly eyes, and the inability to form a coherent sentence, we need to show it with acts of love. But what constitutes an act of love for you may not be interpreted as an act of love for you partner. At the beginning of the courtship we use all the currency we have, so the partner gets the right currency sometimes, but we do not notice which currency was most welcome. You may later give one type of currency and your partner may not deal in that currency. Have I got you confused yet? All penguins use the same currency, humans don’t, we use many different love currencies, and our partner consumes the currency just like the mechanical clowns digesting the Ping-Pongs and you hope to hit a high score. This is like being sweet to your partner when you are in trouble deep. Guess what, you just scored a low score and wasted your money. The right currency at the right time, and you will score high all the time.
So if you use the one currency all the time, you are a penguin, just hope you find another penguin that uses the same currency of love in return.
If you and your partner wish to learn more about each other’s currency of love, and reinvest in your relationship, Give me a call.
Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.
I found this program interesting… As the council charges a lot of money for a business to purchase a parking lot when a new DA in submitted.
Also in a large complex each shop must contribute and pay for the parking supplied by the body corporate.
have a listen … This does not have anything directly to do with Psychology, But Parking or the lack of parking does contribute to stress.
Some Places in Sydney charge $16/hour to park your car.
sending...
