Guest Posted December 17, 2003 Report Share Posted December 17, 2003 Like ISO 9000, ISO 9001, ISO 9002, ... Exactly, but they are called naiv9000, naiv9001, naiv9002, ... Best regards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaiLuk Posted December 17, 2003 Author Report Share Posted December 17, 2003 some people come to find they are trying to relate one way when their innate "personality type" is actually another. For those people, and I was one, to be put on the right track and be lead to the true real self laying in wait beneath the false 'persona' (A Jungian term) is a milestone in one's life. Jung said: ?There is a destination, a possible goal... That is the way of individuation. Individuation ... embraces our innermost, last, and incomparable uniqueness, it also implies becoming one?s own self.? Jung also calls it ?self realization.? And ?self? is the entire psyche, not just the conscious personality. ?The aim of individuation is nothing less than to divest the self of the false wrappings of the persona on the one hand, and of the suggestive power of primordial images on the other... Through the persona a man tries to appear as this or that (assuming social roles), or he hides behind a mask, or he may even build up a definite persona as a barricade.? As Gohok said, to attain self knowledge you have to get past your persona (if the mods are wondering WTF this all has to do with relationships, I?m getting to why Mr Farang chooses his thai girl so bear with this long post.) Jung believed that humans, in contrast to their false persona, were essentially controlled and perceive the world through the lense of the collective unconscious. The most influential effects on a person are caused by three archetypes: the shadow, the anima and the animus. The shadow is an archetype deeply embedded in the psyche of all humans and has been there from the beginning. The shadow contains the darkness, it is possessive and emotional. It shows its face ?usually where adaptation is weakest?, that is where our personality is inferior. If you have ever gone into a jealous rage, then you have already met your shadow, and you know where in human relations your personality is at its weakest. The anima cannot be explained clearly. It is an image of a feminine being. ?She is not an invention of the conscious, but a spontaneous product of the unconscious.? She is an archetype found only in men. Woman have the masculine animus. When someone mentions your mother to you, on the surface you believe you are thinking just of your mother. But the term ?mother? has connotations prompted by the anima. Your idea of ?mother? may have not too much to do with your real mother. The anima projects an image onto your mother that may leave you with a very different outlook on her than the outlook of say, your mother?s friend. A man?s projections caused by the anima can be extremely powerful, and difficult for the man to recognize. ?What, then, is this projection-making factor? The East calls it the ?Spinning Woman?- Maya, who creates illusion by her dancing.? (Jung always talks in mythological terms, since archetypes cannot be entirely understood rationally). In a man?s psyche, there is an image not only of the mother but of the daughter, the sister, the lover. These images are projected onto the persons mentioned, and often are illusions, not reality. Every lover is turned into a mirror by the anima, reflecting back to the man ?the ageless image, which corresponds to the deepest reality in a man.? Among other things, ?she stands for the loyalty which in the interests of life he must sometimes forgo...? (ha ha, think about what that last assertion means). When you meet a woman and are struck by lightning tho you only talked for 30 minutes, and find yourself thinking ?goddam I?d like to have a woman like that?, it has nothing to do with the girl. How could it, you don?t even know her. Your anima has seen fit to project onto the girl, and you are drawn to the content of your unconscious like a new born to its mother. Naiv said "Even if the other person hates you, hurts you, it is still your decision to love. " This depends on what he means by the word 'you' in his statement. If a man is not aware and has not explored the anima, is the man making the decision? Once a man is gripped by his anima, there is no changing his mind, his friends cannot help him. His mood and opinion cannot be influenced ?because of the powerfully suggestive effect emanating from the archetype. Consciousness is fascinated by it, held captive, as if hypnotized.? And some woman seem more prone to be the mirror than others. A few farang woman have a mysterious quality that make men go crazy for them, they are perfect objects for a man?s anima. This brings me to thai woman and Mr Farang?s choice. Thai woman seem mysterious to farang, because of cultural differences, language difficulties, seemingly incomprehensible behavior and opinions. To the perception of a farang, thai woman are ambiguous, unlike typical farang woman they encounter day to day who seem up front and knowable. These thai woman are similar to the rare mysterious farang woman, they are perfect mirrors for the anima. The anima can fill in all the ambiguities with its own image content. Farang fall hard for thai woman because they are an unknown and therefore become his unconscious. The differences in education, language, the different steps in the pyramid are meaningless to a man?s unrealized psyche as it projects onto his thai girl. __________________________ quotes taken from Carl Jung, Aion (translated from the german in 1951) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FIGJAM Posted December 17, 2003 Report Share Posted December 17, 2003 flyonzewall said:>>>I believe in universal standards (for example human rights). <<< things have to still be taken in cultural perspective. human rights is a nice ideal, but unfortunately no place on earth is free of violations. The point, that you didn't get, is that to perceive the violation of whatever "human right" you have to have the notion and the belief in that "human right". The different cultures and civilizations of this earth have different notions and beliefs in what "human rights" are. In other words, what is a violation to your eyes may be not to someone else's from a different culture. There ain't no such things as "Universal Human Rights". It's just political corrected bullshit. Ciao, FIGJAM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FIGJAM Posted December 17, 2003 Report Share Posted December 17, 2003 jasmine said:I do believe that certain things should be universal. However, culture and customs play big parts in making people different. What does that mean? That, for example, "lying is a bad thing" for all the different cultures and civilizations of the world and are just the individuals to singularly brake that rule or that in some culture lying in not that bad and shameful thing?.. jasmine said:One country standards cannot be used as other's, IMO. So, for example, the "western standard" that beating a woman is a very bad and shameful thing is and _should_be_ just that, a "western standard"? Which cannot be used as others' (i.e. to condemn the fact that and in some culture and custom beating a woman is not that biggie)? jasmine said:There are times that I feel becuase of this so-called "universal standards" are pushed too far and because of it, we do have conflicts in the world. Conflicts are inevitable whenever too different systems of beliefs and morals "interact". The only way to avoid conflicts is to avoid contact. And that is becoming less and less possible in today's world. For example, how can you let people "infibulate" (sew the vagina) their children in the house next to yours, _because_of_their_culture_ when with all your fibers you feel that is one of the most orrible things imaginable? Without solving a conflict of this kind no life in common is possible, do you agree? And how is possible to solve such a conflict if not, for one of the two parts, giving up their "culture"? And what part do you think is going to win? The more "right" and "human" part? There is no right part, no "universal standards", "common morals" and "universal rights" exist, as you correctly state. So, the stronger one will win. Of course. I'm just happy my morals are those of the stronger (for now) one, the fucking western civilization. Yours, Jasmine? What would you do in this case? Not the "cowgirl", by chance? jasmine said:If we can respect other beliefs and culture, Try to respect burning a little girl's face by acid because she _has_been_ raped and hence "dishonored", or killing a widow on a pyre because her husband is dead... jasmine said:perhaps, we can try to understand other people better and try to convince instead of acting like a cow-boy to get things "my ways", we can communicate better (Christ how I hate this political corrected crap...) You have to understand that not always two points of view are compatible or can be "mediated". I think I have already given you some fine examples of something that can't be compromised. How do you come to a compromise on, say, infibulation? Less stitches? Ciao, FIGJAM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 17, 2003 Report Share Posted December 17, 2003 >>>I'm just happy my morals are those of the stronger (for now) one, the fucking western civilization.<<< you mean the one which bombs the shit of other countries to "liberate them", supported some of the worst dictators in other parts of the world? the one which had the inquisition, the nazi empire, invented colonisation, the one which has comitted more genozides than any other civilastion, etc...? definately something to be proud of... always interesting when someone judges other cultures by their worst aberations but conveniently forgets his own cultures shortcomings. when in a glasshouse... but i guess you know the saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FIGJAM Posted December 17, 2003 Report Share Posted December 17, 2003 flyonzewall said:>>>I'm just happy my morals are those of the stronger (for now) one, the fucking western civilization.<<< you mean the one which bombs the shit of other countries to "liberate them", I wish we really did exactly that... Instead, we are trying to replace their "wrong" values with our "right" ones (and democracy is among them) and we are losing a lot of *our* lives trying to do that... Would the roles be reversed, who has any doubt about how they would have behaved with us?.. flyonzewall said:supported some of the worst dictators in other parts of the world? To fight against even worse dictators and perils. The funny think, fly, is that it's exactly the people like you who have forced the govts to choose the lesser evil instead of just blow the motherfuckers away... flyonzewall said:the one which had the inquisition, the nazi empire, Evils that we have fought and condemned and of which repudiation we have founded our modern societies on... flyonzewall said:invented colonisation, the one which has comitted more genozides than any other civilastion, etc...? Pure and simple bullshit, fly. All the PC crap (coming from our very western society) that you have learnt from stupid, hypocritical, opportunistic, ignorant politicians and that you are here repeating can't change of the slightest bit the history of the world. flyonzewall said:definately something to be proud of... When you live in a shitty world you can be proud if your shit smells less than the others'... flyonzewall said:always interesting when someone judges other cultures by their worst aberations but conveniently forgets his own cultures shortcomings. Where and when I have forgotten/denied our own shortcomings? We are not perfect, nor particularly "good". We are simply less bed than the others. What got me started is the allusion to a certain "cowboy", made by Jasmine... He is actually one of the few and of the last who still has the power and the will to try to save our asses from the future your PC crap is getting us westerners into... FIGJAM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redbaron Posted December 18, 2003 Report Share Posted December 18, 2003 to condemn the fact that and in some culture and custom beating a woman is not that biggie Try to respect burning a little girl's face by acid because she _has_been_ raped and hence "dishonored", or killing a widow on a pyre because her husband is dead... For example, how can you let people "infibulate" (sew the vagina) their children in the house next to yours, _because_of_their_culture_ when with all your fibers you feel that is one of the most orrible things imaginable? ummm... who's cultures endorse these procedures? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 18, 2003 Report Share Posted December 18, 2003 >>>He is actually one of the few and of the last who still has the power and the will to try to save our asses from the future your PC crap is getting us westerners into...<<< BWAHAHAHA!!! anyhow, i don't have the time to debate with you now, going for a holiday in a few hours. i can only guess that you gonna post yourself into the shit again, like last time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasmine Posted December 18, 2003 Report Share Posted December 18, 2003 [color:"red"] What got me started is the allusion to a certain "cowboy", made by Jasmine... [/color] Just wait a minute, the "cowboy" is just a figure of speech!! However, ones have a right to interpret as ones like, I give up Jasmine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pattaya127 Posted December 18, 2003 Report Share Posted December 18, 2003 Guys, whoever started it, no politics, please! The mods on this section have been a bit here and there, flying to BKK or else, but the rules remain. Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.