HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: sfjr@wam.umd.edu (Sherri)
Subject: Re: Multiple personalities (was Re: Schizofreny?
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 20:53:25 GMT

In article <1992Aug27.194941.1@fnalno.fnal.gov> holzman@fnalno.fnal.gov (Daniel B. Holzman) writes:
>In article <1992Aug27.223052.302@wam.umd.edu>, sfjr@wam.umd.edu (Sherri) writes:
>> If you prefer cases, I recommend the books _The Flock_ and _Sybil_ the
>> most.  I learned things from _When Rabbit Howls_, but it had more flaws
>> than the first two.
>
>What flaws did you find in _Rabbit_?  I found the book excellent, although it
>must be understood that it is written by all 92 of Truddi Chase's
>personalities.
>-- 

Well, I based that statement more on some friends reactions rather than
my own, and I'm not that positive about what their issues are.  The main
thing that bothered me a lot was in the afterward by her therapist.  He
certainly seemed to be encouraging her belief that one of her personalities,
Ian was his name, I think, the Irish one, was a being who had lived before
she had.  While I don't think that therapists should fight patients who
believe that their personalities are really separate people, I think it's
very dangerous to encourage this belief.  

Sherri



Newsgroups: sci.psychology
From: wilkman@med.unc.edu (Alice Wilkman)
Subject: Re: NLP
Keywords: NLP   NeuroLinguistic Programming
Organization: UNC-CH School of Medicine
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 17:25:21 GMT

In <1992Sep02.012615.12587@crash> johnlee@crash.cts.com
John Wiley writes: 

>Lee Lady writes:
>>I did learn two extremely simple little techniques.

>Yes, yes...  Please tell us what they were.  I realize these were things
>you use "on yourself," but perhaps they'd be of interest to all of us?

Indeed!

It will be fascinating to hear what Lee Lady, who has been usenet's most
eloquent advocate of NLP, has found so valuable. 

Sandy Wilkman
wilkman@med.unc.edu
From: parkes@itp.ethz.ch (Andrew Parkes)
Subject: What is "bipolar rapid cyclic disorder"?
Organization: Institute for Theoretical Physics, ETH, Zuerich, Switzerland
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 01:05:50 GMT


(Please redirect me if this is an inappropriate group.)

The subject line says most of what I would like to know.  But, I also have
more specific questions such as:-

Taking it literally I suppose the disorder just means quickly oscillating
from one end of the emotional spectrum to the other (this sounds kind of
familiar :-) ). But this interpretation seems to me (I'm not a psychologist)
just like manic depression, so what are the distinguishing signs?

Is anything known about what causes it?

Also, I'm told that there are three chemical treatments used  
Tegretol.   (sp?)
Valproic Acid    (sp?)
Lithium
Does anyone have any experience with these?  Are they worth the side-effects?

Anyway, this is all totally new to me, so I'd really appreciate hearing any
information.

Thanks 

Andrew Parkes,     parkes@itp.ethz.ch 
   All these brain hardware/software problems are a pain. 
   Why is good documentation always so slow to come out?



Xref: sparky sci.psychology:3628 misc.education:3272 sci.edu:965
From: JHARTLEY@cmsa.gmr.com
Newsgroups: sci.psychology,misc.education,sci.edu
Subject: Re: INTERESTING STORY
Date: 2 Sep 92 20:53:49 GMT
Followup-To: sci.psychology
Organization: GM Research Labs

In article <schnitzi.715453172@eola.cs.ucf.edu>
schnitzi@cs.ucf.edu (Mark Schnitzius) writes:
>Is this what is happening to them?  Is there any
>way to do this trick on yourself when you are
>having trouble remembering something? Any other
>comments, opinions?

There is a similar (same?) phenomenon in memory called "spontaneous
recovery".  You are trying to remember a name, for example, and can't
get it.  You eventually give up.  Sometime later, while doing something
unrelated the name seems to "pop" into your head.

The theory is that in trying to recall the name, you dredge up wrong
information or associations and these endure and block access to the
correct memory.  Only by leaving behind these blocks and shifting
attention can you open up the path to the right answer.
Note: that explanation is my shortcut answer - too lazy to look up
the totally correct explanation.  But it is close.
From: johnlee@crash.cts.com (John Wiley)
Newsgroups: sci.psychology
Subject: Re: NLP
Keywords: NLP   NeuroLinguistic Programming
Date: 2 Sep 92 08:26:15 GMT
Organization: CTS Network Services (crash, ctsnet), El Cajon, CA


Lee Lady writes:
>I did learn two extremely simple little techniques.

Yes, yes...  Please tell us what they were.  I realize these were things
you use "on yourself," but perhaps they'd be of interest to all of us?

btw: thanks for your posts.  They've helped to rekindle my interest in
NLP, since my initial enthusiasm for some 1 and 2 day seminars in the '80s.
Newsgroups: sci.psychology
From: an683@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Dean C. Gelston)
Subject: Re: sexual addiction *joke*
Reply-To: an683@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Dean C. Gelston)
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 92 07:28:14 GMT


In a previous article, an683@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Dean C. Gelston) says:

>
>Peter,Gods first angle walks in on God whom is apparently
>building something.
>
>"God what are you building?"Asks Peter.
>
>"Why I'm building a man and a woman." God replies.
>
>"Can I help in your creation God please."Peter persists
>
"Oh very well hand me some of those low sensitive nerves...no Peter not those
>those are super sensitive nerves... Yes that's right those."
>
>"Well what are these for God."
>
"Now I an working on the butts of the humans and I don't wish them to be 
very sensitive so if the are bad I can spank them and not do serious damage."
>
>"Oh I see,but why are you only building one of each."comments Peter.
>"And what are these super sensitive nerves for any way."
>
>"If you must know I'm planing for my creations to produce off spring by 
>themselves."
>
>"That's fantastic God,but how do you plan on doing that and how can you be
>sure that they will produce."
>
>"Well, you see Peter that's what I'm working on now there reproductive
 organs and that is what these super sensitive nerves are for.I think if I
 make sexual reproduction feel good ,how could they not want to have sex,
>now hand me some more of those super sensitive nerves."
>
>Gee God that's sure is a lot of those nerves."
>
>"Well, I want them calling out my name."

>
>Moral...
>"Everyone is some kind of junkie,there's Money junkies,Booze junkies,
dope junkies,sex junkies, we're every thing your parents ever warned you 
about and there is one thing that they don't understand.
All of us you and I we're Godz,and the Godz are Rock & Roll machines 
no hearts,but at least were machines.Some day there will be thousands of Godz
thousands of machines,more of us then there are of them,
the Godz are Rock & Roll machines,
the Godz are Rock & Roll machines,
the Godz are Rock & roll machines...>" The Godz.this is not a complete quote
but I'm trying,we're all trying... Pleasant dreams.
From: phys169@csc.canterbury.ac.nz
Newsgroups: sci.psychology
Subject: Do We Dream In Reverse?
Date: 25 Aug 92 22:00:16 GMT
Organization: University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand

Hi,
I'm not sure if this is the correct newsgroup to ask this, but...

Is it true that two events heard or felt while dreaming are built into the
dream in the *reverse* order in which they were sensed?

I heard this many years ago as an observation, and can say that, at least once,
this was true for me.  Two external noises were clearly represented in my
dream, but the order in which they occurred in the dream was the opposite of
what was obviously their sequence in real life.

Is this a know fact (or misconception)? Has it been studied? Is it well-known
trivia??  I'd love to know why (although I have some theories myself, I'm no
psychologist, as you probably guessed).

Mark Aitchison, Physics & Astronomy Dept., University of Canterbury.
Newsgroups: sci.psychology
Subject: Re: sexaul addiction (Should be Antisocial personality disorder)
From: th@isr.harvard.edu (Todd Heatherton)
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 20:31:13 GMT
Organization: Harvard University, Cambridge, MA

In article <CMM.0.90.2.714856008.margog@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> margog@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Margo Garcia) writes:
>According to some posters, my recent message needs clarification.  Perhaps I
>should qualify this by saying this is the first time I've come across someone
>with this addiction and that perhaps his behaviour cannot be universally
>applied.  In this case, the person to whom I refer has admitted to having the
>"gift" of manipulation, which he uses frequently.  He admits as well, that he
 [much detail deleted]

It sounds like he is a classic Antisocial Personality Disorder 
individual (formerly called sociopath).  About 1-2% of
US males meet diagnostic criteria for this "disorder".
I think your term addiction is inappropriate in this case,
and the behavior is more easy to understand when viewed
as a symptom of general antisocial behavior.  These individuals
are extremely well known for their manipulative lying, cheating,
and stealing, and they generally have very shallow feelings
(i.e., egocentrism and cold, calculating emotion).  Such
individuals often feel remorse only because they get caught
(i.e., they don't feel guilt about the behavior, it's just
that getting caught inconveniences them or creates problems).
Therapy is usually not successful because these people
really believe that there is nothing wrong with them.
There are females with Antisocial personality disorder, but
they tend to be more rare.

My advice is simply to stay clear of this individual.  There
is little chance that anything that you do will lead to
lasting change.  Therapy is notariously unsuccessful for these
people, since they  attend therapy usually at someone else's
insistence.  I would not trust this person at all.

Finally, I doubt that this person could be considered misogynistic
in the sense that he isn't just actively anti-female; rather, he just
doesn't really care about anyone else's feelings, needs, or
desires, or anything else for that matter.
Newsgroups: sci.psychology
From: atul@nynexst.com (Atul Chhabra)
Subject: ranking of graduate programs in clinical psychology in the US
Organization: NYNEX Science & Technology, Inc.
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 01:09:45 GMT

Where can I get a ranking of the graduate programs in clinical 
psychology in the US. The publication Gourman's Report lists
the top thirty universities in the US that offer graduate studies
in clinical psychology. I am looking for a more complete ranking.
Any help would be appreciated.

Please respond by email. If there is sufficient interest, I 
will post a summary on the net.

Thanks.

Atul Chhabra
----
atul@nynexst.com	(914)644-2786
From: exudeb@exu.ericsson.se (Dave Breeding, xt-dGR,)
Newsgroups: sci.psychology
Subject: Re: NLP
Date: 31 Aug 92 18:09:20 GMT
Reply-To: exudeb@exu.ericsson.se
Organization: Ericsson Network Systems, Richardson TX

In article n0863t@ofa123.fidonet.org, Ed.Evans@ofa123.fidonet.org () writes:
>DBX>NLP is two things:
>
>I enjoyed and saved your post.  I did learn to cause a slight chill in
>my shoulders from one of the techniques talked about in the NLP books,
>but it doesn't work under any real stress.  It seems nice in hot weather
>when I remember to use it.
>
>You mention that you're due for some training, where will you go, and
>what about cost?  I would like to learn and use NLP, but the cost seems
>prohibitive for me.  Maybe I'd be better off going to a therapist to
>learn it; what do you think?
>___
> X SLMR 2.0 #1708 X No Freedom without Wilderness!
>
>--- Maximus 2.00

I will do two trainings this fall: 2 and 1/2 days on a specific topic of interest to me; and a 16 day Master Practitioner training.  Cost of the first is $260, and of the second $2250.  These are pretty typical costs (figure $100 to $150 per day).  Yes, it can get expensive.  And only you can decide how interested you are, how much it is worth to you, and how much you can afford.  Obviously, I think it has been (and will be) worth a lot to me.

Personally, I wouldn't try to learn it by going to a therapist.  Doing it and teaching it are not the same thing, and someone good at the one may not be good at the other.  Experiencing it and learning it are also not the same thing.  Part of a training is the opportunity to experience it, but you also get demonstrations, explanations, and practice doing it.

I would suggest trying a 1 or 2 day introduction, or workshop, by a nationally known trainer, if you can find one locally.  Sometimes, they will do these for little or no cost as a way of interesting people in a longer training.  This will let you "try on" the subject, and the trainer, at minimum cost.  As you build a base of skills and knowledge, you will be able to do more and more on your own (reading books, experimenting, etc.).  If you want more, then the next step is a Practitioner training (usually 

about 20 days, and $2000 to $2500).  These are offered locally in many cities around the country.  Talk to others who have taken the training you are interested in, and then go for what you can get out of it.  No training is perfect, and none that I have been to was worthless.

Don't be discouraged by those who say it doesn't work (some of us know it does).
Don't be discouraged by those who say ordinary people can't learn it (some of us know we can).

Good luck, Dave
Newsgroups: sci.psychology
From: mdkline@rodan.acs.syr.edu (Mark D. Kline)
Subject: Re: Schizofreny?
Organization: Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 19:39:47 EDT

In article <1992Aug22.155052.5183@wisipc.weizmann.ac.il> jhsegal@wiscon.weizmann.ac.il (Livy) writes:
>Hi.
>I am particullary interested in cases of "double personality".
>ANYTHING about it...(cases,description,etc...)
>I find it to be extremly interesting...
>Livy

Multiple personality disorder (MPD) is not the same thing as schizophrenia.
The September 1990 issue of the journal Psychiatric Clinics of North
America was devoted to MPD.  Look in Index Medicus or Psych Abstracts
for the writings of Richard Kluft, MD, who's the preminent MPD expert.

--
================================================================= 
mark kline                              mdkline@rodan.acs.syr.edu
suny health science center, syracuse    voice: (315) 422-1050
================ courtesy of syracuse university ================
From: jkp@cs.HUT.FI (Jyrki Kuoppala)
Subject: Re: Polyamory (was Re: Adults, Children and sex) (LONG)
Reply-To: jkp@cs.HUT.FI (Jyrki Kuoppala)
Organization: Helsinki University of Technology, Finland
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 06:36:29 GMT

>I will state that
>being 'homosexual' will cause problems for people in this society
>since the behavior is generally held to be 'bad or at best less than
>good'.

Hmm.  What exactly are classified as mental problems or impairments?

One definition I've seen and which I gather is used in society (legal
circles) is "someone incapable of functioning in society".  If the
society is very intolerant towards homosexual behaviour, persons
openly exhbiting homosexual behaviour might well be incapable of
functioning in that society.  In a society very intolerant towards
psychoactive substance use, people who insist on using such substances
will be incapable of functioning in society and thus classified as
mentally impaired.  In a society very intolerant towards dissenting
political views, dissidents will be classified as mentally impaired.
A society intolerant towards different self-images or different
behaviour patterns will classify people with a self-image of multiple
personalities or more depression as mentally ill or impaired.  And so
on.

What is the view in the psychological field - ie. do they acknowledge
a view like this or is there a meme of some kind of "absolute" mental
illnesses / impairments?  Or is the question not even considered since
even the psychological field is so closely attached to the culture
that it's function is to a big degree to "normalize" people, not help
them in what they want to be?

Well, that came out mighty provocative.  Just some food for thought,
don't take it as my well-thought-out view on anything.

//Jyrki
Newsgroups: sci.psychology
From: ehf@philabs.philips.com (Eberhard Fisch)
Subject: Re: NLP
Originator: ehf@oscar
Reply-To: ehf@philabs.philips.com (Eberhard Fisch)
Organization: Philips Laboratories, Briarcliff, NY 10510
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 18:58:54 GMT


In article <1992Aug27.124258.40868@urz.unibas.ch>, spissinger@urz.unibas.ch writes:
|> Hi,
|> 
|> I read some books about NLP and was really fascinated by the elegance and
|> effectiveness of the method. But when I tried some of the techniques myself it
|> didn't work.
|> 
|> What's the problem?
|> Does it only work when Bandler does it?
|> How do psychologists look at NLP?
|> What are the latest developments?
|> 
|> Thomas
|> 

I was just about to post exactly the same message as you, Thomas. I have had   
a similar experience with NLP. I've purchased many of the NLP books, was 
fascinated, and found Bandler rather entertaining. I've also tried many of the 
NLP patterns on myself and others and they didn't seem to work. I don't know if 
you have this problem but in my case I believe that a major problem might be that 
I can not yet visualize very well on a conscious level. My visualizations tend to 
be very shadowy, crude black and white and without much detail. This makes it 
nearly impossible to determine and change submodalities. My dreams, however are 
extremely detailed and vivid so the ability to visualize does exist on an 
unconscious level. In the books: 
"Change Your Mind And Keep the Change" and "Heart of The Mind" Steve and
Connirae Andreas address this kind of problem by saying "just pretend you are 
doing it". I tried this approach and it also didn't seem to work.

After these first failed attempts I was still not ready to give up so I
decided to consult an NLP therapist. So far I've had three sessions with him and
he also has not been able to produce the kind of rapid changes that are discribed
in the NLP literature. My conclusion at this point is that either I'm not well
suited for NLP techniques because of my inability to visualize or that only very 
gifted and skilled practitioners such as Bandler can achieve the kind of rapid
changes discribed in the NLP literature.

Perhaps someone who has actually had some NLP training can explain how to get
around some of these difficulties.

			-Eberhard  
Newsgroups: sci.psychology
From: eddie@hermes.oit.unc.edu (Edward M. Averett)
Subject: Re: How to Cure Readers of alt.sex.bondage
Keywords: aversion therapy
Organization: University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 22:12:21 GMT

Gee, I guess it's time to go watch "A Clockwork Orange" again. ...  -) 

				eddie@legba.oit.unc.edu
Newsgroups: sci.psychology
From: rolfl@karl.uio.no (Rolf Lindgren)
Subject: Re: Do We Dream In Reverse?
Organization: Institutt for Humanistisk Informatikk, Blindern, Oslo, Norway
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 23:39:55 GMT

In article <1992Aug26.100016.511@csc.canterbury.ac.nz> phys169@csc.canterbury.ac.nz writes:
>   Hi,
>   I'm not sure if this is the correct newsgroup to ask this, but...
>

I'd think so

>
>
>   Is it true that two events heard or felt while dreaming are built into the
>   dream in the *reverse* order in which they were sensed?
>

I don't think that's accepted by the scientific community

>   I heard this many years ago as an observation, and can say that, at least once,
>   this was true for me.  Two external noises were clearly represented in my
>   dream, but the order in which they occurred in the dream was the opposite of
>   what was obviously their sequence in real life.
>

Most likely you percieved the two noises, remebered them, and dreamed
about them in an order better suited to the narrative of your dream.

--
       Rolf Lindgren           |       "The opinions expressed above are
       616 Bjerke Studentheim  |        not necessarily those of anyone"
       N-0589 OSLO 5           |           rolfl.lindgren@usit.uio.no 
Newsgroups: sci.psychology,alt.sexual.abuse.recovery
From: chenowet@rd1632.Dayton.NCR.COM (Steve Chenoweth)
Newsgroups: sci.psychology
Subject: Re: Polyamory (was Re: Adults, Children and sex) (LONG)
Date: 28 Aug 92 20:47:43 GMT
Reply-To: chenowet@rd1632.Dayton.NCR.com (Steve Chenoweth)
Organization: NCR Technology & Development, Dayton, Ohio

In article <l6annd_.noring@netcom.com> noring@netcom.com (Jon Noring) writes:
>In article baba@samadhi.Tymnet.COM (Duane Hentrich) writes:
>
>>In article samurai@uriel.cs.mgill.ca writes:
>
>>>In any event, I assure you that Psychologists would think that 
>>>sex with one's mother at the age of 15 is not healthy behaviour. ...
>
>Years ago, most, if not all, psychologists/psychiatrists believed that
>homosexuality was not healthy, ...
>
>Thus, by this one example, it is clear that mental-health professionals
>themselves are susceptible to society's influences, paradigms and biases,...
>
>This leads me to change the thread and present a related topic that I have
>become quite interested in because of recent personal experience, and that is
>polyamory. ...  At present, most psychologists would
>automatically assert that a person who is inclined to have more than one close
>and intimate romantic/sexual relationship is somehow "imbalanced" ...

The authors provide examples of behaviors frowned on by society generally,
with these views seemingly reinforced by the psychological community.

This has to be a tough area for psychologists.  On the one hand, they were
brought up like everyone else and share our negative reactions to these
things.  On the other hand, they've been put into a special position which
calls for keener judgment than that.  And it's obvious that their views
are influential, as leaders in saying what's mentally healthy and the like.

To those of us on the outside, it would seem best for psychology to represent
diverse points of view, in the hope that scientific struggle would lead to
some new and more robust ideas.  This should extend even to allowing advocates
of some weird stuff into scientific and professional discussions.  Indeed,
in the kinds of situations described by the authors, above, the most
disheartening thing must be that psychologists often seem comfortable about
putting them down.  Like they're sure everyone else whose views they trust
would agree.

The long-term way to change psychological opinion must be to become a part 
of it.  As a peer, you're in a much better position to shape things like
DSM's.  I think some of the minorities have tried to do this in recent
years -- it would be interesting to hear what they (and other psychologists)
have to say on the subject.



-- 
Steve.Chenoweth@Dayton.NCR.com
Newsgroups: sci.psychology
From: dyer@spdcc.com (Steve Dyer)
Newsgroups: sci.psychology,alt.sexual.abuse.recovery
Subject: Re: sexual addiction
Date: 26 Aug 92 17:35:16 GMT
Organization: S.P. Dyer Computer Consulting, Cambridge MA

In article <CMM.0.90.2.714848886.margog@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> margog@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Margo Garcia) writes:
>Recently, I have been victimized by a sexual addict.

How?  Through infidelity?

>I first became
>suspicious when certain things began not to add up.  Soon, the red flags
>could not be ignored and my questioning of this person became more forceful. 
>Eventually, he admitted to a long hsitory sexual addiction.

Of what sort?

>Despite 5 years
>of concurrent individual and group therapy, he still continues this extreme
>misogynistic behaviour.

How is sexual addiction a sign of misogyny?  Perhaps if you define
sexual addiction better this will become clear.

-- 
Steve Dyer
dyer@ursa-major.spdcc.com aka {ima,harvard,rayssd,linus,m2c}!spdcc!dyer