Continuing my thought process.
I spent 31 years as a forensic neuropsychologist. I tested, evaluated and interviewed tens of thousands of patients. They call it a “practice” for a reason. In the end you hopefully come out of the practice with an expertise; possibly knowledge and understanding.
Since I was little I pondered time. I felt if I could not sleep I could use my time to my betterment. I could sleep on a picket fence during a war. I have maybe 5 nights in my life I did not sleep well. So I know that sleep is essential to a healthy being.
Having worked in sleep institutions and researched the topic I have an understanding of how sleep persists in all mammals. It has evolutionary roots. Why would an animal sleep with the fear that a predator roamed nearby. Even sharks sleep.
The point I am trying to make is that people don’t KNOW things and therefore can’t UNDERSTAND them, yet they still APPLY them.
Work with me here as I attempt to explain and unfold my thought process through a series of blogs. Your input may be helpful.
I will state that my theory hinges on something that has haunted me since little but more on that later as it unfolds.

One of my minor’s was Psychology. Another was Philosophy. As it turns out Philosophy is the mother of psychology, The father is Wilhelm Wundt, How these two got together to produce Psychology might help clarify some of the problems of psychology.
When I left the U, my professional baseball career took over. Baseball, at the professional level, is a cruel business. You perform or you leave. The fun game I grew to love revealed itself as a cold hearted business that all professional sports share.
But that perform or leave knowledge made me a better person. I came to KNOW that the real world does not work on “do or go home” skills but tends to be dependent on other factors. People with limited skills, with unjust goals prey upon those who do not KNOW and certainly do not UNDERSTAND but can APPLY a psychological pressure that will get what they want with the long term goal having a Political Science ending.

Miami offered an exposure to many different cultures and beliefs. I cannot tell which was better 4 years at Lane Tech or four years at the U. The KNOWLEDGE poured in. The UNDERSTANDING came through making mistakes, taking chances and failing. The APPLICATION developed slowly but with that solid mother and father guidance. They had no idea what the world would become but they laid out a loving foundation upon which to build.
I took my inner city urchin and explored. I even learned how to intermingle with various groups, not only ethnic but the layers of educated, the layers of famous and the layers of wealth. I learned to change and adapt to the people around me. Because of my height, blonde hair and blue eyes I had to learn to blend in. I used these attributes to open doors.
I figured out a course outline to give me four minors in addition to my major in Mass Communication-Journalism. In a Political Science class the first time professor was a young man filled with idealism. He had all the students draw a country out of a hat. Each country had a list of resources and trade abilities. Each country had different levels of armies and weapons.
The countries met in class in UN meetings. This class came about before the Zimbardo experiment at Stanford only the result of this class was not expected but the Zimbardo results explained it.
The nuclear countries took a leadership role at the UN table. It took but a few weeks before nuclear war ended not only the world but the design of our political science class. The professor looked horrified at the result. As I reflect I came to understand that the basic rules of psychology must always be a part of UNDERSTANDING but it was not even part of KNOWLEDGE.

Well sort of.

When I was a senior in high school I met a girl by accident that I knew would be my wife.  I thought I was really cool and smart.  She came to a baseball game I was playing in.  Between games I saw she was reading Camus.  To impress her I made a comment about Camus.  She laughed and said that Camus did not espouse that.

Determined to prove her wrong and me smart I gathered her book to look for my belief.  “Hey, this book is in French,” I said.

“Most French writers write in French,”  she said in all seriousness.  I was humbled.  When I learned she got a perfect score on the SAT I thought “What does she see in me?”    I was determined to be as smart as she.

When I went to the University of Miami (the benchmark of world thought, on a baseball scholarship no less) I went through the course guidelines to graduate.  I read that book everyday.  My roommates teased me about my fascination with that booklet.  But they all asked me questions about what they had to do to graduate on time.

I graduated with a major in Mass Communications and four minors, psychology, English, philosophy and political science.  Sunshine U as it was known back then (now it’s the Stanford of the South) gave me a great education.

I took philosophy classes from the department head.  He made philosophy come to life.  He said, “In your lifetime you will come across many people who will have a philosophy of life and most will not know the efforts of the great thinkers.  I will go a step further and guarantee that none, nada, zip will be politicians.”

My past time centers around reading philosophy works.  The WWW makes this possible and easy.  I could go into video games with philosophical undertones and tell you why we don’t teach this in school , but it would fall upon deaf ears and bad feet.

Today is Spinoza’s birthday.  Of all the philosopher’s he is the one I align with.  Seeing as philosophy is the mother of psychology and me being a psychologist connects the dots.

LABELS

I was raised Catholic and I find it wise to say that in a Catholic country.  But I don’t practice the religion.  I am a registered Republican so I can vote in Florida primaries.  I don’t practice the party.

But the label of Catholic and the label of Republican has given me an insight that keeps me on the rails.  If Democrats felt toward Muslims the same way they feel toward Republicans they’d all be on the same page.

I have a belief, an understanding, of the world.  I don’t espouse to the religions that stem from the Bible.  Just the knowledge that there is no agreement, as proven by the many interpretations, might suggest a problem.  But I accept your right under the US Constitution to have your beliefs provided they don’t violate human rights.  In fact, I admire people of true faith (not the radicals).  I wish I could believe as they do because everything is delusionally okay.  They BELIEVE, honestly believe, and I admire that.  I admire more their acceptance of my continued search for understanding.

Here Spinoza enters my life.

He connected God and Physics in a way that is unfolding in our lifetime.  I nod my head to Baruch.  So many great thinkers and he was one of the humblest. Some of those guys were arrogant.  I guess understanding God, man and the universe (without need  of a telescope) can lead to arrogance.

The world is mine because I understand it.  I know what God is.  I know my role in the universe.  I understand and appreciate my limited time of consciousness.  I admire people who search but frown upon the unlit corners they search in.

I appreciate our view of individualism.  However if you look on FaceBook the posts center around anti-individualism expressed by individuals who don’t ‘get it.’

Remember what you were thinking before you were born?  After you die those same thoughts will return.

I have a friend who knows what he was thinking before his birth.  Unfortunately it is the same thinking after his birth (go figure)

 

 

 

 

 

 

My parents realized I loved to play baseball and that I was talented. My mother assessed that I played to have friends and quickly she changed my style of play. “When you step onto that field you will be booed and hissed at. People will say horrible things and they might throw things at you. Your goal is to quiet them with your great play. Show them you love baseball. If I, your mother, crowds the plate, you knock me down. You understand.”

I view the world through the eyes of a baseball player. You perform or you find a note on your locker. There is no crying, begging or equal rights. You perform, shut the crowd down and you can play again tomorrow. Cold but true. You are either a business asset or a liability. Guess who plays tomorrow?

This is a story about writing groups. I belong to three writing groups. Two of the groups work under the model that you read, the listeners critique and everyone is happy. This violates a cardinal rule of psychology — not everyone plays nice or even understands the rules. Here the rotten apple rule comes into play. You get one rotten apple and the whole group dissolves.In my world there would be a note on your locker.

“Oh but you can’t hurt someone’s feelings or ban them from an open group” Yes you can but to show how baseball works, they lowered the mound then shorten the strike zone and enforced the game clock. They redesigned the kitchen, so to speak.

Sorry but I say nice things about really poor writing because I want you to like me. If given the chance I would rewrite the whole thing in a style that I feel is appropriate. In essence taking away your voice.

I have a fellow writer who repeatedly says, “If you are not going to publish, then why write” That is wrong on so many levels. As a neuropsychologist for 31 years the single best therapeutic technique is to write. Not to publish but to look at your thoughts.

Don’t need to think outside the box as much as create your own new box.

In keeping with my baseball mentality I would change the height of the mound. Everybody (group members now enjoin you in writing rather than criticize) gets to read whatever they choose. The writer gives out double spaced copies and the critique is to rewrite, add, edit, suggest. You then have the option to read YOUR rewrite, ask questions open dialog with the writer. You show don’t tell. This promotes interaction, gives ideas, encourages writing, not reading and eliminates the person who complains because they have to do what they might have criticized. Everybody wins.

Because the WRITING is so intense and shared the writer must make a request for his material and is allotted a half hour to get what he or she needs. Because others are writing as well there is no downside except some people don’t want to write. (time for a locker note)

This was so successful in a group I attended that famous writers attended. In order to get into the group you had to submit your work. It didn’t start that way but became so popular that they had to slow the crowd at the door. They tried splitting the group but that violated another psychological rule. They are still running and they claim the most published book club in the U.S.

I would attend with a book chapter, explain my goals and gave the handout without reading. The group members each rewrote my chapter and the feedback was a learning experience for ALL. I learned so much about technique. Right now you get a regression toward the mean. The group demands a certain type of material, “too long, “too short” are words that are not spoken. Wordy, loose. extraneous are euphemisms but the length may be the voice.

The poets started their own group. They tended to be arrogant and snobbish and the writers were happy with their departure. But they shared readings with each other instead of public readings and that proved successful and motivating.

The group later evolved into experts. Some offered information on poetry, beginnings, endings, characters, marketing. This spawned great ideas for plots and POVs. I returned to say hello recently and they changed again. (a good ball player adapts to the situation). They opened up a teaching section to separate it from the writing session. It turns out the same people attend both because the quality is so good.

CHANGE THE DESIGN.