Please help.

T

tht

akstavrh
I feel quite glad that my parents took an extremely anti-psychiatric line in my childhood when my behaviour was ridiculously bad
Click to expand...

there was an article on the daily mail website a few days ago where some frigid ex au-pair recounted how a child smeared feces (shit) all over the bathroom and her employer saw this as indicative of creativity

good shit
 
N

nomadologist

Guest
tht said:
there was an article on the daily mail website a few days ago where some frigid ex au-pair recounted how a child smeared feces (shit) all over the bathroom and her employer saw this as indicative of creativity

good shit
Click to expand...

ha this is exactly the problem. too many of these types exist and they ruin peoples' perception of the psychiatric profession.
 
B

bassnation

the abyss
tht said:
there was an article on the daily mail website a few days ago where some frigid ex au-pair recounted how a child smeared feces (shit) all over the bathroom and her employer saw this as indicative of creativity

good shit
Click to expand...

could have been a dirty protest against the parents suffocatingly middle class aspirations.
 
G

gek-opel

entered apprentice
tht said:
there was an article on the daily mail website a few days ago where some frigid ex au-pair recounted how a child smeared feces (shit) all over the bathroom and her employer saw this as indicative of creativity

good shit
Click to expand...

I did that a few times apparently (as a young child) and not just in the bathroom!
 
N

nomadologist

Guest
guess it depends on how old you were, how potentially pathological it was. a lot of times, smarter children are just better manipulators. they know what to do to get attention.

one of my uncle's daughters growled "kill the parents" at him when she got in trouble for something at around 3-years-old. i couldn't help but laugh.
 
T

tht

akstavrh
hypothetical infantile fecal smearers

stravinsky
eminem
lacan
peaches geldof
beria
jesus
john lydon
 
N

nomadologist

Guest
tht said:
hypothetical infantile fecal smearers

stravinsky
eminem
lacan
peaches geldof
beria
jesus
john lydon
Click to expand...

john lydon probably still does it

ever see that reality show he was on in australia or something? hilarious
 
H

hundredmillionlifetimes

Banned
nomadologist said:
Yeah, this happens. I call them "Park Avenue" shrinks. They spend so much time treating those who can best afford it but [often] need it least, that they become obvious racketeers. I can't say I blame them.
Click to expand...

large_melfi.jpg


"I throw down all my bones, and you offer me a hanky?"
 
N

nomadologist

Guest
hundredmillionlifetimes said:
large_melfi.jpg


"I throw down all my bones, and you offer me a hanky?"
Click to expand...

hehe

fav sopranos quote:

dr. melfi's husband to her--"Some day, you're going to get past psychoanalysis, with all its cheesy moral relativism, and you're going to get to good and evil. And he is evil."
 
H

hundredmillionlifetimes

Banned
nomadologist said:
hehe

fav sopranos quote:

dr. melfi's husband to her--"Some day, you're going to get past psychoanalysis, with all its cheesy moral relativism, and you're going to get to good and evil. And he is evil."
Click to expand...

And isn't this the ultimate expression of the decline of 'symbolic efficiency' in a globally reflexivized and mediatized society: the impotence of interpretation (and it took Melfi seven years to reach this despairing conclusion!), and a recourse to a pre-reflexive underlying substantial state which eludes our grasp and is instead irrationally attributed to some brute cause - one's (blind) Nature or supernatural 'evil' itself. So the more that everything today is reflexivized, is reduced to a matter of relativistic 'opinion' and self-rationalization, the more the temptation to, the implicit reference to some inscrutable nature or evil that pervades daily discourse, even the most otherwise rational analysis. Even Tony Soprano is impervious to treatment precisely because he has already rationalized his symptoms in pop-psychoanalytic terms, so leaving his symptoms "intact in the immediacy of their idiotic jouissance."


In this sense Tony's reflexivization and resulting naked , non-sublimated baseball-bat approach to social reality is analogous to that of the skinhead that Zizek describes: "What happens in psychoanalytic treatment is strictly homologous to the response of neo-Nazi skinhead who, when really pressed for the reasons for his violence, suddenly starts to talk like social workers, sociologists and social psychologists, quoting diminished social mobility, rising insecurity, the disintegration of paternal authority, the lack of maternal love in his early childhood — the unity of practice and its inherent ideological legitimization disintegrates into raw violence and its impotent, inefficient interpretation ... a violence one is tempted to call Id-Evil, a violence grounded in no utilitarian or ideological reasons. What we encounter here is indeed Id-Evil, i.e., the Evil structured and motivated by the most elementary imbalance in the relationship between the Ego and jouissance, by the tension between pleasure and the foreign body of jouissance in the very heart of it. Id-Evil thus stages the most elementary "short-circuit" in the relationship of the subject to the primordially missing object-cause of his desire."
 
swears

swears

preppy-kei
ask a philosophy stude on msn

swears says:
alright

mark says:
hiya

swears says:
http://www.dissensus.com/showthread.php?t=6626&page=8
check out the last post, at the bottom

mark says:
just reading it

mark says:
pfft, had to fucking unpack that

swears says:
lol

mark says:
yeah, obviously he is psychologizing evil

swears says:
which is bad cuz?

mark says:
he thinks that the methods of interpreting a persons violent actions in this day and age are inefficient

swears says:
aren't they?

mark says:
so people want to reduce it to good and evil

swears says:
and?

mark says:
and he's saying that it is actually evil

swears says:
what is?

mark says:
but its not grounded in some transcendent reality

mark says:
we just need better methods of interpreting it

mark says:
that's what i got

swears says:
ok...

mark says:
why did you send me that anyway?

swears says:
just thought you might find it interesting

mark says:
the guy who wrote it was obviously a tit

swears says:
uh ok

swears says:
why?

mark says:
well, it was full of techincal terms

swears says:
so?

mark says:
why would a person use such terms in a public forum

swears says:
why do you think?

mark says:
so he can score clever points with girls
mark says:

mark says:
LOL

swears says:
hahahaha

mark says:
he had a good point though

swears says:
i'm gonna post this chat on the forum

swears says:
see what everybody thinks

swears says:
that ok?

mark says:
whatevs

mark says:
and hes saying that there is actually evil

swears says:
and there isn't???

mark says:
what do you think, mate?

swears says:
fuck knows
 
H

hundredmillionlifetimes

Banned
LOL. BTW, which one of you was the analyst and which the 'hysterical subject' (the analysand, demanding answers from a posited Subject Supposed To Know), or did the 'fuck knows' denouement suggest or further confirm your discursive androgyny and fatalistic interpretosis? Leading you to project a supernatural ('evil') excape valve on to an otherwise materialist interpretaion [the immanence of desire ] ...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top