make money online
Saturday, September 24, 2016
Future Challenges in Healthcare Management
Saturday, April 13, 2013
Scenario Thinking
Tuesday, March 26, 2013
Psychology In Practice
Gestalt Therapy in Practice
Edwin Nevis describes gestalt therapy as "a conceptual and methodological base from which helping professionals can craft their practice." In the same content, Joel Latner stated that Gestalt therapy is built upon two central ideas: that the most helpful focus of psychotherapy is the experiential present moment, and that everyone is caught in webs of relationships; thus, it is only possible to know ourselves against the background of our relationship to the other. Latner, J. (2000) The theory of Gestalt Therapy, in Gestalt therapy:Perspectives and Applications, Edwin Nevis (ed.) Cambridge. MA: Gestalt Press
Gestalt therapy, although looked upon rather suspiciously by many people, grows ever more popular and widespread over time, and begins to be well known to people who are generally very far from the problems of psychology. Here is the exemplary account of one of cases when it helped a person to develop her inner potentials and make a decision that changed her life.
A woman in question, for the purposes of convenience let’s call her Jane, moved to the new place of residence in another town and only managed to get a job of boiler-house employee, because there were not much job opportunities for outsiders. After a while, she entered a course of Gestalt therapy, which was formed along the following pattern. All the participants of this group therapy in turn communicated with the psychologist who directed the course, and were told to form images of two living beings: the one that they liked and the one they disliked. Jane liked “the fox” (for being cunning, brave and active) and disliked “the hen” (for being passive, silly and inert).
The idea of the therapy is that the liked image is what the person wants to become, while the disliked one – what she is. Over the course of communication with the psychologist, the patient and the whole group come to a decision how close the patient is to his or her desired image. In two subsequent sessions the patient imagines herself to be what she likes and what she dislikes in turn; in the course of this study, the patient together with the psychologist decide what keeps the patient from becoming what she wants to be, what makes her resemble the disliked image, what hampers her when she imagines herself to be what she likes.
The connection between the two images led the group to decide that the thing that kept Jane in the image of a hen was her job, and that her real aspiration in life was to start a center for children’s development. Jenny followed that idea and started such an establishment with surprising (for a former boiler-house employee and a resident of a town with population less than 10,000 people) success. Thus, we can see how this therapy is able, by means of a series of seemingly senseless procedures, to define the underlying motives of a human being and direct him or her accordingly.
Friday, March 8, 2013
I Fear This Might Be Overlooked
Tuesday, May 8, 2012
THE AGONY OF DECISION
Tuesday, May 31, 2011
Wednesday, August 11, 2010
Saturday, May 16, 2009
Thursday, April 30, 2009
Making a Life
We talk too much,love too seldom,and hate too often
We have learned how to make a living,but not a life
We've added years to life,but not life to years
We've been all the way to the moon,but have trouble crossing the street to meet a new neighbour.
We've conquered outer space,but not inner space
We've cleaned up the air,but polluted the soul
We've conquered the atom but not our prejudice
We write more,but learn less,we plan more but accomplish less
We've learned to rush,but not to wait.Becoming a successful human being is in the little things that are really the big things- in how we treat others,in how we meaningfully spend our limited time and in the enduring legacy that we eventually leave behind.Entails leaving a trail- It entails making a life and not a living.
Friday, April 24, 2009
The Paradox Of Our Times
Thursday, April 23, 2009
The art of existence
Friday, April 17, 2009
I Gave Reality A Human Face
that life brings along
I watch as happiness passes me by
happiness stares me in the face
yet I fail to see it in its true self
I look for fulfillment in all the wrong places
I hope an' think I will be satisfied with worldly things
I think money-lots of it
means happiness like no other
I nourish all my physical needs
yet I still feel empty inside
For a while I wonder why,
then I realise all this is useless,
useless if I don't learn to satisfy my inner self
my soul,my spirit
useless if I don't learn to share it;
to share it unconditionally
to share it abundantly
to share it expecting no grattitude
I didn't know how to live a fulfilling life
A worthwhile life
to realise that my absense for just a minute
wouldn't bring the world to an abrupt stanstill
I didn't know how to live
till the day I gave reality a human face
by chris kihara
What you sow
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
A Good Friend
Live for today
He, who can call to-day his own
He, who secure within, can say
To-morrow, do thy worst, for I have
Liv'd today
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
Live each Day at a time
src="http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/show_ads.js">
Thursday, March 5, 2009
Is Man Headed For Extinction
IS MAN HEADED FOR EXTINCTION?
Social disorder is becoming rife throughout the world. How we cope with it would decide the fate of our species.
Few will deny the proposition that overcrowding also has profound effects on human behaviour effects especially evident in the 19th century. Until the rise of the city, space sheltered us. We competed, as men will always compete, for the big prices of territory, wealth, position. But as long as space was our vast asset, the territory with a fence around it was an objective all sought with enthusiasm.
Today, however as urban concentration continues to grow and competition shifts from dominance over a piece of space to dominance over fellow men, we encounter a vanishment of prices. Dominant individuals, competing as they must for the dwindling number of dominant slots find their aggressive potentiality becoming increasing uncontainable.
Thus the frustration of urban society are forcing on each citizen knowledge of his own nature: that we never have been and never shall be created equal. There is a lot wisdom when George Orwel in his book Animal Farm observed that some animals are more equal than others, that we get along more because we must than because we want to, that we are an aggressive lot easily given to violence. This we hate.
It has to be noted that the city is not a concentration camp, we freely enter the city - producing overcrowding, which eventually leads to a breakdown in the social structure which in turn calls forth urban disaster.
The paradox of the middle class is best explained by three innate and powerful needs which we as humans share with other higher animal. Arranged here is their order of importance.
1. Identity the opposite of anonymity
2. Stimulation, the opposite of boredom
3. Security, the opposite of anxiety
Increasingly, the achievement of economic security, with the resultant release from anxiety, is producing the bored society. The bored society could not be a total reality; however, were we not also an anonymous society stripped in large part of our opportunity to search for identity.
And hence the frustration of the search for identity from above, just as much as the achievement of security from below, forces us into the unendurable area of boredom – from which we can escape only through stimulation.
Violence, like pornography, is a means of stimulation. It carries with it excitement for both violator and violated, whether through the joyful hatreds of the one or the fearful rages of the other.
An urban riot is worth all the circuses that old-time kings could provide. And just like any other form of sensual shock, to retain its stimulation violence must move on to ever stronger or more novel levels of expression. That adaptable animal, the human being familiarizes himself all too easily to any present situation.
However, in so far as fresh sensory experiences satisfy only our need for stimulation, violent experiences tend to satisfy identity as well. The violent are praised whether the praised be the praise of collaborators or the condemnation of antagonists. The little world of violence is recognized. And within this cancerous world of new fellowship, blooms, a new communication flourishes, anonymity vanishes, and identity again becomes possible.
Nevertheless, however, in seeking identity through violence, we sow the seeds of our own destruction. If you sow to the wind, you reap a whirlwind so to speak. Aggressiveness by definition is the determined pursuit of one’s interests. Violence is the pursuit of such interests through force, or the threat of force. They are not the same.
Without aggression is an inborn force, survival throughout the entire natural world would be impossible. But, likewise, survival dictates aggression's limits. The rules of survival otherwise termed as the social contract dictates the evolvement throughout the many animal species, a body of rules and regulations which while encouraging the aggressive, discourages the violent. The problem of man today is not that we are aggressive but that we are breaking our own rules, in our violence; we are ignoring the social contact.
There are two different expressions of human violence. Namely:
1. The struggles within groups of social partners and the struggles between societies
2. War, which today is either winnable or inclusive.
As neither of these results is satisfactory, human violence, once expressed on the battlefield, is now being transferred to the city streets.
If we are to understand the civil substitute for war which is, riot, sabotage, assassination- then we should first inspect carefully the concept of the stranger.
The howling monkey roars, the spider monkey barks, the lion, without warning, attacks. It’s as though amongst the animal kingdom, invisible curtains hang between the familiar and the strange. The social rejection of strangers is as widespread a characteristic within social species any single characteristic we can study. Members of a limited group of similarities know what to expect of each other, and in such groups sufficient order come easily. But the new comer presents a problem. If his attentions persist he is driven out of a group’s social space and physically attacked.
Thus we have in our genetic make-up the tendency to reject strangers; we also have the propensity for violence. War may be nearly abolished but these tendencies are not. Faced with the question- “How do we get along without war?” We subconsciously transfer energies once directed outwards to the inward expression known as social violence. But such an expression presents an interesting problem. Now we must invent strangers.
The fundamental factor for the invention of strangers has to do with non-communication between those who speak the same language and share the same territory. In today’s society blacks and whites, parents and young, students and faculties, governments and the governed, have shown the workability non-communication, the creation of strangers and the transformation of acceptable aggressiveness into unacceptable civil violence.
A young person with a stone in hand is enjoying themselves. We rush to an accident not to help, we hurry to a fire not to put it out, we crowd around a fight not to stop it. Action and destruction are fun to us.
The concerned on-looker who will not accept this fact indulges in the hypocrisy which we cannot afford. The one who regards a taste of violent action as a human misdemeanor is not likely to make any great contribution to the control of our violent ways.
As one views the causes of violent behaviour rising before modern man, the conclusion that we are finished comes with great ease. Since men can live neither with each other nor without, extinction seems on the cards but any such conclusion is inexhaustible.
The social contact is an arrangement of biological validity. Like the sexual impulse of human diversity, it acts to pressure the species with a power which is far beyond human comprehension, Therefore what is at stake in modern times is not the survival of man, but the survival of the suggestion that man can succeed in social order through voluntary action.
The chances look good, because there is visible through all nature a prejudice in favour of such order. Lions and elephants restrict there numbers so that a habitat will not be exhausted by too many offspring. All such arrangements of animals give simple proof to the preferences for order in natural ways.
Fact: violent sub-groups threaten modern society. But likewise the very complexity of our social interdependence threatens the survival of these groups. The social animal cannot stand alone, least of all contemporary man.
Human foresight, combined with a biological need for order, should take center stage before total social disorder. The question that we cannot answer for now is when shall enough of us see the road to disaster in time?
If we do, then with whatever pain, we shall have to accept various comprises, give up certain rights which we believe sacred. We shall provide honours of identity which we now disapprove control our violent confrontations, within such ritualized aggressions as negotiation, seek to correct those true injustices that lend responsibility to violent arrangements and discourage social applause for the violator.
But what if we do not? What if we lack the will or the vision to see what awaits us?
Several years ago an eminent American journalist and historian Theodore White, wrote a simple comment that ought to be stamped in the minds of every active democracy; ‘If man cannot agree on how to rule themselves, someone else must rule them”.
If we do not have the clairvoyance, if we do not have the will, then we shall find out one day who waits to rule us.
Author: Chris Kihara