i would like to include tolle in my list of interviewees for my final paper

cesca the kitten

im picking up on a lot of cbt therapy practices that can be derived from the practices described here

practicing the 5 senses cbt routine but not just in times of crisis!!!!!! ANALYZING!!!! I LOVE ANALZYING!!!!

totally present while folding my laundry

again, mindfulness

i do not judge cesca she s just a lovable kitten who is sometimes mean to me but i love her because i know shes more than that. she is my voice and my mind

the voice is cesca and i am watching. her

meeeee

observe the mind -- like in CBT?

end (pg 34)

MMMMMMMMMM like what happened to me today

mindfulness--living in the present moment-- is this.so mindfulness is feeling being, but not understanding it. basically, dont think too hard and try to chase it. you have to let it happen to you as a result of.. being. i think im following

robson was 22 when he made the oath and was now 30 when he claimed abuse

not saying that a 22 year old isnt a fully capable adult age for these kinds of things, but like. a lot about a person and their mental state can change in that time. like i think if people are able to be manipulated to the degree that they can be, i dont find a realization that it was actually abuse all that time to be out of the realm of possibility.

the autism section maybe hes cooking

lol @ the assumption that penises are the original form of genitals also i wonder if theres anything in particular about being a boy that makes girls really want to be boys...... maybe societal privilege or something..... hmm.... nah its gotta be the penises

so... no child then, because its impossible to determine which child is susceptible to the libido

i wonder if this guy likes women

breasts are not inherently sexual

Really? Really? You cannot admit that you exaggerated?

Oh did you conduct a study?

im deadddd is he implying that all neurotic people have scat fetishes???????

ok so now hes agreeing with the educators? i thought he disagreed with them. or maybe he only disagreed with their unwillingness to address the situation. i mean, he's casting judgment here, unless im reading too much into this idk

wait so the genitals are responsive as an infant? did not know this

ok so this is a lot, i get where hes coming from but this is a ton of conjecture regarding the feeling of the baby. we can't ask this baby what's going on and what he thinks. the expression on one's face as they fall asleep is hardly enough evidence to propose a meaningful connection

i would like to know where he's getting this information. my instinct is not to believe him because ive never heard of tthis before. i mean, i can imagine it, but he's like "It Is Known That This Occurs" and im like , i didn't know! Nobody talks about this!! and again yes the cultural stigma. of course. but still

This was not well-known to me! well.. okay! really important here that freud uses the word unscrupulous to point out that the nurses here are doing A Bad Thing. this increases my trust in his pov here; not that i thought he was morally questionable simply for writing this essay--lord knows im interested in the topic myself--but like. You kinda, you wanna know! You wanna know where he stands

ok. starting off strong.

ok so sometimes sexual stuff breaks free from the latency period, and that i presume is what child sexual behavior looks like. im struggling to understand the second part i think... hes saying that educators dismiss child sexuality as a vice and deems these children ineducable but "we" (psychologists?) will turn to the topic without fear to search for the answer to the origin of sexuality in brains

instinctual impulse becomes turned into a socially acceptable behavior = sublimation

period of latency = children havent hit puberty yet and cannot act on sexual feelings the way older people can. but the urges still exist, they just appear in alternate ways

ok so we are born with sexual instinct and then it gets suppressed by culture. makes sense

hes saying people dont want to address child sexuality because they are concerned with conforming to societal norms

he says we have amnesia about our childhoods until 6-8 years old. i disagree, idrk where hes coming from with this one.

.

i mean, im on board with this idea. i am!

.

happens all tha time

.

fishless

ok ok i rescind part of my venom, i get it, he was the first one to be sayin shit so he was just sayin whatever,

I think that freud's way of analyzing slips by drawing out a hidden motive from them is like OCD-catnip. like could you imagine if you were really drawn to rigid moralistic thinking and it interfered with your life and you make a little mistake as a result of your brain computer making an error, and suddenly just like that its "oh i'm a monster who's secretly thinking this and that" like damn way to just completely remove the control from yourself

look i know we were talking about free will in this class and im still not entirely sure how much free will humans have but i know we DEFINITELY have more free will than freud's goofy ass thought

--Try to formulate a moral principle or set of principles that could morally extend to every culture. Please come with at least one. We might go around the seminar room and hear from everybody.

If another person's actions are not putting anyone's life in mortal danger, killing that person is wrong.

-- If you are not from Iran, do you believe you are in a position to morally judge the cultural practice of so-called “honor” killings there? If so, on what basis do you judge what is morally right for another culture? If not, how do you make your peace with this seemingly accepted cultural practice?

Yeah, I think I'm in a position to morally judge "honor" killings. Murder, abuse, pedophilia, family systems and values, none of these things are unique to Iran in particular. All of these things exist in the West to a certain degree, and if I can judge the moral values that are in play here, why should it change just because it concerns a culture in a different part of the world than mine? So, I guess my basis for judging the morality of another culture is whether or not the morality transcends culture and enters the topic of human rights.

-- Get on top of the facts of the situation: e.g., what happened, and what Iranian law says in this situation.

Romina was 14 years old with a 29 year old boyfriend, who had courted her since she was 12. Iran has no laws against adults dating children.

Her father had no qualms with the age difference, only disapproved of the man's family.

Romina rebelled against her father by showing her hair and wearing jeans. Her father abused her by confiscating her phone, keeping her at home, threatening her with death and ultimately killing her.

.

.

.

important

im really fw with G and C

.

this would have confused me if i were in the situation because the sentence C said doesnt make any sense to me. but the teacher doesnt bat an eye, they just repeat what C said to M. because it isnt necessary for the reasoning to align with the teacher's logic, nor does the teacher need to know the whole contextual backstory. because if the teacher did, then that could put them in. situation in which they have to ask themselves what THEY think the right solution is, and that's not the idea at all!!!, only M needs to understand C.

YES because theyre the ones playing the game and they have the real stake in the matter FUCKKKKKKKK

SOMETIMES CHILDREN ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT THE SAME ISSUE!

JHDJKHKSDJKFHS True....

every resolution ends on a positive note from the teacher. positive reinforcement

REASONING

YEAH THATS WHAT I SAID

ooooooo so the teacher is just fully adhering to what the child says first. if K says "he can write his letters" then that's that... UNLESS R can express a take of their own. The children are fully in the arena here, and using words to communicate is not only encouraged by the teacher explicitly, but implicitly in the very environment that they have created.

difficulty speaking is helped, of course. R seems quieter than K by a long shot, but the teacher is mediating the whole time, and that means assisting R in his communication.

so many things here

• presents the alternate option of talking to K
• expresses that the "talk" option comes with help and support from you, but "fight" option does not
• positions you, the teacher, as an ally to the child rather than an enemy (i won't let anyone hit you either)
• in response to the potential question "why talk instead of push?" the answer is, "because one comes with explicit support and protection while the other one does not"

soooo important!!!!

.

they dont know 0???

fuuuuckkkk

.

.

idk eddie is really cooking here in this situation like. i get it i really get it. He understands he cannot fundamentally change karl so he just offers his opinion and leaves it at that. he recognizes that he is responsible for his own actions but not for others.

would i take this mindset and expand it to the whole world? Well no. we have to make change somehow or else its every man for himself. maybe its like. Small enough circumstances need not be interfered with but big ones should be. or you can interfere a little bit, just enough that it adds up little by litte, diffused across time or circumstances

very fair!

relatable

.

.

the heinz dilemma

okay. my opinion, placing myself in the position of the child here (so if i was under the complete impression and belief that robovie was sentient), my answer would be YES it deserves civil liberties. (i should also preface this by saying that i think prisoners should have the right to vote and to receive compensation for their work) but robovie is not sentient so now what. what would robovie do with the money. money doesnt mean anything to it. and how would robovie know what to vote for. i feel like if a non-sentient robot COULD vote, it would be a huge conflict of interest for us humans because whos telling that robot what to do?

HOLY SHIT????

HOLY SHIT.

Holy shit.

oh my god......

okay so ACCORDING TO the child, who is taking all of this info at face value, robovie has thoughts and feelings and history and is able to care about things. CAN robovie care about things? No. Because Robovie is not sentient. Robovie is following a script that was meticulously composed by humans. But i digress. the child doesnt know this.

buynothing: hair rollers

moral education of patriotism

to be a patriot is to be in favor of the country even when the country is unjust, at least when its taught in many cases

moral education of loyalty--but to what?

? what is a learner in this context

kinda interesting that he'd say this. to me this sounds like a flaw. does he approve of this or disapprove? it sounds like he must find it bad but he thinks the tradition is great

this guy will not stop saying great tradition and its setting my teeth on edge at least now hes gonna start stating what it actually Is

immediate thought: okay, what do the moral values look like in this Great Tradition?

this guy is spitting. i think that education should be a place where different ideas can be challenged and discussed by all. because that gives the lesson strength. you can indoctrinate any old idea by suppressing all other points of view, but a lesson that can prove its worth by going up against opposing arguments is one that is truly sound and worthy of teaching.

i take it here that by relativism he means the idea that everyone should tolerate the ideas of others even when the ideas of morality clash. I also agree with this because of the paradox of tolerance.

ah okay so this guy has an actual reason to state for what happened with the Great Tradition

EXACTLY

RIGHT cause he didnt explain exactly how the shift in education was contributing other than vaguely describing it as fracturing from The Great Tradition. he does so much leaning on this nostalgic idea without fleshing out the differences. i dont recall any actual examples or anything he shared about this

how did fear and violence evolve? hunter-gatherer groups 30-40 ppl, nomadic for the group to survive, every person is critically important mutual regard and caring the in- group. survival depends upon the group, not on own where does belonging come from? There the person who distributes the meat is not the hunter, but the person who gave the arrow to the hunter. so the hunter isn't necessarily the one in full control PALEOLITHIC not neolithic. human mind starts changing as you go from nomadic small tribes to secure agricultural civilization HERES THE DEAL: hatred and fear of outgroup is not genetic. so thats pretty good for the potential of us being able to overcome this? Peter is saying mcdermott and hatemi might be wrong with this one

thinking about how many cultures across the world once had very progressive views on, for instance, gender and sexuality, but colonization made its mark on the people's views to the point that those same nations are now extremely socially conservative. Philippines

ive heard it stated that the genocide in palestine is the first time in history that such an event has been broadcasted to the entire world in such an intimate manner thanks to social media. however, due to the way that algorithms work, everyone sees such a personalized version of content, news and information that we still have a fractured and divided base of people. those who are already predisposed to being anti-war are seeing and engaging with this never-ending stream of info, while others living right next to them might not hear of it at all.

ok im not gonna say that chimps arent hugely connected to humans because they are, and it is useful to observe their structures to compare them to humans in an attempt to understand human nature. THAT BEING SAID. bonobos are equally related to humans as chimps are, and their structures are much different. none of that patriarchal alpha male aggression is present in bonobo social structure. it's a matriarchal society that prioritizes gentleness in males and largely uses sex to resolve conflicts and bond socially (contrasting with chimps use of hunting and aggression to resolve conflicts).

im putting that out there because whenever i see chimps being pointed to as The Closest Relative To Humans, i want to challenge the notion that aggressive male behavior is the only example we can point to when discussing evolutionary human nature. thats all, soapbox over

hmmm

ok. well serious conflicts happen. idk what tot tell you

summerhill solos this fraud school entirely

so? youre just inventing a new system that creates its own variety of men

so what happens when a child loses points for complaining during the soup test? does the child know theyve lost points? do they ever find out? what are the consequences for that? because if the child knows then there is definitely a punishment. perhaps not an intentional one, but there is a feeling that the child has done something wrong.

Okay so then you're sheltering them from reality and introducing challenges that are not nearly as tough as the challenges of life. How is that preparing them for anything

hmm but these situations are entirely contrived. the only reason the children have any relationship with pains are because theyre decided by the authority. so theyll experience aches and pains in the real world, fine, but those can and will have so many different reasons. if they experience a famine, they won't have the school authority to turn to as the reason behind it. their learning experiences are artificial in nature.

HOW do u know this to be the case, frazier,

HUH???? HUH????? HOW

agree with skinner

yeah this is definitely potentially traumatizing to a child. will it equip the child to be able to handle self control in the future? sure, maybe. it could also teach them to fear authority and break down in a time of need. it could become a trigger. every person reacts differently to this sort of thing. what works for one child may break another. and hard times don't make strong people, they only identify which people make it through alright and which people don't. plenty of people who have experienced trauma are able to snap into action when a high-stakes situation happens. my girlfriend is one of them. she can react to an emergency with great clarity. but what of her ability to perform under low stakes, during times of stability? she's not trained to operate in those situations. its very difficult for her. also this type of lesson can have unintended consequences. the fact that any groaning or complaining results in a wrong answer teaches children to suppress themselves. what if, in the future, the child needs to speak up in a situation where they're being mistreated, but can't because a part of themselves forbids them to?

because humans have schemas and biases and convictions and cultural influences and worldviews. human memory is not perfect, we've seen strong testimonies of people who remember having witnessed 9/11 and described in vivid detail, looking out at the towers from over the harbor. even though the harbor is not actually situated that way, and is therefore physically impossible to have actually happened. my earliest personal memory is of my first birthday. i remember the visuals and the sounds and my own thoughts. except human memory doesnt develop in a way like that until ages 2 or 3 at the very earliest. so what does it mean that i can recount a moment, complete with context, in vivid detail as a 1 year old? it means that our brains do many things to rationalize our lives. humans have always liked a good story. we try to fit it in everywhere we can. we like to put emotion and meaning into the things that matter to us. it's one of the things that we can observe throughout history, all the way back to the earliest story.

and i think that thing is a product of their own minds. I dont say that in a bad way at all, i think of it with great interest. i think its a fascinating aspect of the way we humans perceive our world. and if thats what god is, if god is a collection of motivations, beliefs, and neurons firing, then i think that's great. i just dont think its the same blanket statement across the entire universe is all. or even just the world of humans. thats why i dont think ethics are defined by a god

human nature?