The suggestion that psychoanalysis isn't exactly recursive gave me pause to reflect on how it might not be, but I can't get past a line of reasoning that asks, then whereof is the source? First, getting past the observation that is Psychoanalysis to what it is thats being studied, if behavior is recursive then psychoanalysis would have to be. Unless you adhere to a divine inspriration as source viewpoint, which even then you have to contend with where do God's whisperings in my ear leave off and my own ideas begin, then its hard to not consider behavior as recursive, if only non-linearly and as yet undiscovered -- but its in there somewhere, its gotta be. Some eastern mysticisms universal subconsciousness beliefs aren't imponderable for me, esp. as they find commonalities with quantum science. There I go again, both sides of the argument; I'm cursed that way.
A good read, considering the expressed interest in the mind: The Care and Feeding of Progressives By Robin of Berkeley December 01, 2010 I've had to ask readers of my blog to register in order to post comments. There are three reasons why: Trolls Trolls Trolls (By the way, I often tell clients that there are three rules for dealing with the character disordered: "Boundaries, Boundaries, and Boundaries." Not surprisingly, the same can be said about extreme progressives.) When I started my little blog, it didn't occur to me that trolls would come out in droves. Why would leftists expend their energies on me? And why would they subject themselves to scrutiny by a licensed psychotherapist? But apparently, numerous trolls have been drawn to me, like venomous bees to honey. These trolls use the same weaponry of other extreme progressives: shame and degradation. They try to use ridicule as sort of stun gun, immobilizing the other. (Another interesting tidbit: People with character disorders do the very same thing. Coincidence?) As a psychotherapist, I can see right through them to who they are and how they operate. Nonetheless, I still remain curious about these creepy crawlers, whom I have dubbed "My Friends, the Enemy." (This is my generally futile attempt to be magnanimous like the Dalai Lama, who uses the phrase to describe the Chinese.) I wonder to myself: Where do these trolls come from? Where do they live and breed? Do they write in dank basement rooms while their bedraggled girlfriends (or moms) pick up their dirty shorts? Do they intermix trolling with downloading internet porn? (I'm not being snarky here; I'd bet good money that violent smut gives them endless inspiration.) Are these cyber-stalkers getting paid from a Soros organization? If so, why can't they find more respectable employment? (Hmm...I suppose the answer to that question is rather obvious.) The creepy thing is that in the minds of trolls, and other extreme Progressives, their behavior is as normal as apple pie. This is because their worldview is amoral and asocial. Therefore, the merit of hurling insults at a complete stranger is a no-brainer. Many leftists are positively clueless about how to conduct themselves in a civilized manner. Believe me, I have tried over and over to engage some -- any -- in a respectful discussion. Although I rarely give up on people, I have had to conclude that many extreme progressives are not simply choosing to be vicious. They do not know how to restrain themselves. For instance, a progressive e-mailed me with the following, "Man, you're really messed up." I replied, scolding her, explaining that her remark was inappropriate. She responded this way, sounding genuinely confused and shocked: "I was trying to be sympathetic! I really didn't mean to hurt your feelings." And in this case, I actually believed her! The most hardcore of the leftists seem almost feral, wild, and undomesticated. Many lack even the most rudimentary of social skills; some people may very well be diagnosable on the autism spectrum. Many militants are devoid of an essential ingredient of being human: empathy. While they exude endless compassion for an endangered snail, they are contemptuous of living, feeling human beings. This is why they can cavalierly imagine snuffing out Granny, a late-term fetus, or, in fact, anyone who gets in their way. With the progressives in charge, we now live in "interesting times," to quote the Chinese curse. There's a breakdown in the basic rule of law that keeps a society knitted together. Without the moral fiber to stitch us, it's survival of the fittest -- every man and woman for themselves. It's no coincidence that God has also been shunned, because God is the thread that weaves together the rich tapestry of life. With Judeo-Christian values missing in action, the left engages in a manic free-fall-all. They afford themselves free rein to act out their basest of impulses. The more extreme progressives have no impulse control whatsoever. They act more primitively than a wild beast as they beat up opponents and sexually degrade conservative women. These progressives are engineering a New World Order, which is dark and devolved and completely unlivable. Their actions remind me of a famous quote by Gandhi about Western civilization. When asked what he thought about Western civilization, Gandhi replied, "Western civilization? I think it would be a good idea." One could say the same thing about progressives' civilized behavior. I hope the newly elected conservatives will have the courage and intestinal fortitude to create some order out of the chaos. If they can break up this manic (Democratic) party, there's hope for this country yet.
I believe the issue is how you and I are defining recursive. I think in Godel's context, if my layman's understand is at least close, it's the notion that the axioms upon which a logical system (e.g., number theory) rests, are basically unprovable using the truth conditions of the system itself. Psychoanalysis doesn't rely on rigorous claims to truth, which is understandably one reason why it pisses people off. If you've ever read Freud or Lacan or anyone else, you'll notice they're not deploying the scientific method. The axioms upon which such theories are based (e.g., libidinal energy is a phenomenon, it is fungible, etc.) not formally proven via the language of the system itself so much as merely observed and asserted. Godel's theory is more applicable to disciplines like analytic philosophy, which constant runs aground for precisely that reason, and which is why most of philosophy since the 50s or so has kind of bracketed or done away with the search for Truth-Capital-T. I'm not a believer in the correspondence theory of truth, so issues like this often present difficulties but are not immediate grounds for dismissing any idea.
I tend to stretch to fit, I like to think figuratively, concepts into less obvious interpretations. To me the stated rigor doesn't prevent entertaining the possibilities for a concepts portability. One of my favorite quotes is, "the truth is a liquid, not a solid", sorry I don't recall who originated it. By the time I'm done with it, it just may no longer be the theory Godel had in mind but instead what his rigor ought to have been. Does that make any sense at all?
Problem is that Republican leaders are not smart in the sense as i nominating the candidates who would actually do something for taxpayers. All they do is they nominate are the puppets for the lobbyists and their respective industries.They know very well they will be financially rewarded . It is all about bribe money right now.. Hopefuly the Tea party movement will lead to the birth of a third party. Both existing parties are way too corrupt to be able to function.
You are absolutelly right. Women are tired of listening to old corrupted farts candidates and want someone they can relate to. However Palin is too stupid to understand that conservative pro life women are just a small fraction of women voters, most are pro choice even those who say in public that they are pro life . Is she eases up on abortion, she will benefit greatly.