thegoodfellas/blogset-br huggingface dataset:
Por Melissa BergonsoPrezados leitores, Salve Maria! Apenas uma noticia bem rapida no meio do recesso do blog: o Mulher Catolica ficou em 2o lugar no premio TopBlog Brasil 2012 na categoria Religiao/Pessoal, pelo Juri Academico! Eu estou MUITO feliz! Nao sabia que chegaria tao longe! Eu fui no evento, foi divertido ver os primeiros colocados pulando e fazendo festa rsrs... pena que o primeiro lugar para o Mulher Catolica nao veio dessa vez, mas quem sabe da proxima, ne? Eu e meu marido na saida do evento.Quero agradecer a todos aqueles que votaram neste blog, que deram apoio e incentivo ao Apostolado Mulher Catolica! A vitoria nao e so minha, e tambem de voces! Meu muito obrigada a todos!Para quem quiser conferir o link da classificacao, acesse aqui.Fiquem com Deus!Salve Maria Santissima!!E ate breve! Por Melissa BergonsoHoje, 12 de Dezembro, e dia de Nossa Senhora de Guadalupe, Padroeira da America Latina!! Imagem de Nossa Senhora de Guadalupe estampada na tilma de Juan DiegoUm pequeno resumo da historia: Nossa Senhora apareceu a Juan Diego em 1531 para pedir ao Bispo da cidade a construcao de uma capela em Sua honra. Porem, o Bispo nao acreditando, pediu um sinal. Nossa Senhora mandou entao Juan Diego colher flores em uma regiao onde seria impossivel ter flores aquela epoca do ano devido ao inverno e ao ambiente improprio a vida de qualquer planta, e pediu para leva-las a Ela novamente. Entao, Juan Diego colheu as flores e levou-as para Nossa Senhora, como Ela lhe tinha pedido. Ela mesma arrumou as flores no manto de Diego e mandou-o levar, entao, as flores ao Bispo como sinal de que Ela realmente estava aparecendo a ele. Chegando a presenca do Bispo, Juan Diego abriu sua tilma para mostrar-lhe as flores, eis que a imagem da Virgem Santissima estampou-se naquele exato momento no tecido, para a surpresa de todos! Analises cientificas da imagem dizem que aquilo nao e uma pintura, pois a imagem nao foi feita a pinceladas, ou seja, e um milagre. Tambem nao se sabe explicar como tantos seculos se tem passado sem que a tilma, feita de agave, nao tenha se desintegrado. Reflexos e imagens nos olhos da Virgem foram encontrados, coisas impossiveis de serem feitos por maos humanas, especialmente num tecido tao rude. As estrelas do manto representam os astros mais brilhantes e visiveis no ceu daquela noite. A historia de Nossa Senhora de Guadalupe e muito bela, e sao intrigantes os resultados cientificos obtidos com o estudo do manto. Ha um livro que conta a historia da aparicao, seu contexto historico e alguns resultados cientificos da imagem estampada na tilma: "O Milagre de Guadalupe", de Francis Johnston, 5a Edicao, Aparecida: Editora Santuario, 2005.Meu filho, o mais querido! Eu quero que saibas, com certeza, que eu sou a perfeita e perpetua Virgem Maria, a Mae do verdadeiro Deus, atraves de quem tudo vive, o Pai de todas as coisas, que e o Senhor do Ceu e da Terra. Desejo, ardentemente, que se construa aqui um "teocalli" (templo) em minha honra, no qual oferecerei e demonstrarei todo
o meu amor, minha compaixao, minha ajuda e protecao ao povo. Eu sou tua Mae de Misericordia, a Mae de todos os que vivem unidos nestas terras, de toda a humanidade e de todos aqueles que me amam, de todos aqueles que choram, de todos aqueles que confiam em mim. Aqui, ouvirei teu pranto, aliviarei tuas dores e darei remedio a teus sofrimentos, necessidades e infortunios. Por isso, para que se realizem minhas intencoes, vai a casa do bispo da Cidade de Mexico e diz-lhe que eu te envio, que e meu desejo que se construa um "teocalli" aqui. Conta-lhe tudo o que viste e ouviste. Asseguro-te que ficarei muito agradecida a ti e te recompensarei por teres feito, cuidadosamente, tudo o que te pedi. Agora que escutaste minhas palavras, meu filho, vai e faz da melhor maneira que possas.[1]E para este dia especial, eu preparei algo para as criancas: um desenho para colorir de Nossa Senhora de Guadalupe. Deu um pouco de trabalho, pois usei a figura original para elaborar o desenho abaixo, mas valeu a pena!Clique para ampliarMeu querido filho, escuta e permite que minhas palavras invadam teu coracao. Nao fiques preocupado e nem te angusties com sofrimentos. Nao temas nenhuma enfermidade ou molestia, ansiedade ou dor. Nao estou aqui, eu que sou tua mae? Nao estas debaixo de minha sobra e protecao? Nao sou eu a fonte de tua vida? Nao estas entre as dobras de meu manto? Sob o abrigo de meus bracos? Ha mais alguma coisa de que possas necessitar?[2]E viva Nossa Senhora de Guadalupe! Senhora e Rainha da America Latina!!Salve Maria Santissima!![1] JOHNSTON, F. O Milagre de Guadalupe. 5a Edicao, Aparecida: Editora Santuario, 2005, p.38.[2] Ibidem, p.49.
used to describe feelings may change. Moreover, the feelings articulated may also change or be carried forward in the process of explication. For instance, a person may say,I feel frustrated...not really, more like Im angry. . . .Itseems to touch a place here that feels hurt. Here, by the very act of checking, the feeling produces different words for the feeling. This checking out of the feeling is called ref erence, or referring to the feeling. We can notice here, that not only do the descriptors change but also the feeling itself is chang ing in the process. It feels different to be frustrated, angry, or to be feeling hurt. Referring to the feeling and explicating the feeling is essential for feelings to embark on the change process. We can say, simply, that the client got in touch with a hurt feeling, but more accurately, the person was referring to a sense that is now called hurt. In the process that the client is now embarking on, the hurt may change into yet another feeling. The act of referring to the feel ing is thus essential to understand how change is brought about.In this article, we discuss the process of referring to a feeling in psychotherapy. Through careful examination of Carl Rogerss and Eugene Gendlins theories, the article proposes a process of referencing. The referencing process differs from the clients referring to her feelings, in that the referencing process is conceptualized as a happening that occurs between the therapist and the client. The discussion of the referencing process will, hopefully, refine and carry forward the significance of client centered and experiential concepts as they are used in psychotherapy practice, as well as illu minate the feeling process that is central in humanistic psychology.REFERENCE AND CARL ROGERSS OBSERVATIONS The term reference is a term that is often used in linguistics to describe what words refer to. The word computer, for instance, refers to this machine that I am now using to write this manu script. Gendlin (1964) used the word referent (direct referent) in psychotherapy to express a particular feeling yet unclear, to which a client was referring to in the therapeutic interview. Later, he coined the word felt sense to point to the direct referent. Tech nically, the expressions direct referent and felt sense can be used interchangeably. Both involve feelings, which are not yet clearly formulated. For example, a client may say:Well, I have this sort of heavy feeling....no, heavy isnt really the right word . . . some stuckness. In this sample statement, the clients words are explicating a certain direct referent or felt sense, expressed by the words heavy feeling, no, heavy isnt the right word, some stuckness. These words do not seem to fit exactly with the direct referent. During the pause, the client is checking her words against her direct referent. This checking is essential for this kind of statement to be uttered, because without this checking, the client will not know that heavy isnt really the right word for the direct referent that she is trying
to articulate. The expression refer to or referring is used to point to this checking. Referencing, as we discuss later, explicates the complex interactional nature of the referring. Although it was Eugene Gendlin who used words such as refer, reference, and referent in the field of psychotherapy, we can see clearly that the phenomena of referring were observed by other therapists, before Gendlin began to use these words. Particularly, Carl Rogers observed and described clients referring to feelings during the therapeutic interview. We quote Rogers here, from his book Client Centered Therapy (1951), a book published before Eugene Gendlin began to work with Rogers (Gendlin [2002] reflects that he began to work with Carl Rogers in 1952):As she struggles to find her true feelings for her father, the one which matches her sensory experience, she uses the interview as a tryout ground. (p. 83) In this observation, we can see that Rogers did not take the cli ents words as definitive, as the client referred to her feelings (about her father) and explicated the direct referent, trying out dif ferent words to express the referent. Seeing that the client was using the interview as a tryout ground, Rogers stayed with the client during the process of referring and explicating.We can also assume that because Rogers reflected the clients thoughts and feelings, without interpreting them, the process of referring to the direct referent was facilitated. Rogerss reflections served as a mirror that accurately reflected what was articulated by the client. The client then checked back these reflections to see whether they accurately explicated her thoughts and feelings. As a result, Rogers (1951) quoted several clients remarking that these reflections on the part of the therapist helped clients understand themselves better: My psychologist took my views and thoughts and made them so that I could understand what was going on. He didnt conclude them but stated them back to me so I could draw my own conclusions. (p. 70) I was never conscious that he was reflecting or restating things . . . but he would clear them up for me, bring me back to earth. (p. 37) It can be observed here that reflecting the articulations of the client enhances the process of referring and explicating. Rogers made these observations in practice, but in theory, Rogers inter preted his observations in a slightly different context, that of empathy, acceptance, and congruence. In theory, he emphasized not the technique of reflecting, but the attitude of accepting the client as she is, and of trying to understand the internal frame of reference of the client.This emphasis on the attitudes of the therapist is understand able and remarkable, given the sociohistorical context of Rogerss works. Rogers revolutionized the field of psychotherapy by demon strating that each person had a self direction implicitly and that utilizing these implicit understandings in therapy was so much more valuable than the diagnostic and therapeutic interpretations imposed onto the client by the therapist. He emphasized the per son as the source of knowledge and facilitated the genuine encoun ter between personsbeyond
can see things differently when we see the interaction, namely the breathing process first. The lungs and air are parts of the breathing process. Without this process, the lungs will die. Changes in air (as in people who live in high alti tudes) also affect the way the lungs function. The interactionin this case, the process of breathingis what determines what the lungs will be and do. Breathing is a single interaction process that involves the lungs, air, and much more.From the way congruence is described, we can see that the usual noninteractional way of thinking is utilized. The therapist and the client are seen as separate entities, who are in contact with each other. The former is congruent whereas the latter is incongruent. Let us now view the relationship from the process model, utilizing Gendlins thinking, as expressed in the following: It is commonly said that each of our relationships brings out differ ent traits in us, as if all possible traits were already in us waiting only to be brought out. But actually you affect me and with me you are not just yourself as usual either. You and I happening together makes us immediately different than we usually are. Just as my foot cannot be the walking kind of foot pressure in water, we occur differ ently when we are the environment of each other. How you are when you affect me is already affected by me, and not by me as I usually am, but by me as I occur with you. (Gendlin, 1998, p. 30)The presence of the therapist already affects the client, while the presence of the client already affects the therapist. The two become a happening together in interaction. In a part of this inter action, the client refers to his or her felt sense and explicates from the felt sense. Becoming congruent is one aspect of the happening together.Congruence Reconsidered In her chapter, Hendricks (2002) defined congruence in a new way. Instead of Rogerss view that it is a match between experience and self concept, she defined it as follows:We could say that our definition is the opposite of match. It is exactly where there is change that we are congruent. Lets say con gruence is the experience of wondrous new experiencing coming out of me! Congruence is when our words emerge from our felt sense and carry it forward. (p. 59)This experiential explication of congruence is remarkably simi lar to, or almost identical with the way we view congruence, although there is a slight difference in emphasis. We emphasize the process of referring to the felt sense, because the act of refer ring to the felt sense is necessary for words [to] emerge from our felt sense and carry it forward. Moreover, although this is some what overly technical, we would not say congruence is when which would make it seem that congruence is a state that is achieved when two conditions are met (i.e., one: when words emerge for the felt sense; two: when these words carry forward the felt sense). We
would say, instead, that the process of becoming con gruent is the referring to the felt sense and letting words emerge from there. Sometimes the words that emerge will carry forward the felt sense, and sometimes not. However, the continuous act of referring to and explicating the felt sense is the process of becom ing congruent.Interestingly, an identical definition was proposed by Gendlin in 1964 to articulate focusing. He wrote, Focusing is the whole pro cess which ensues when the individual attends to the direct refer ent of experiencing (p. 115). Hendrickss explication and ours would amount to saying that focusing is the process of becoming congruent.Becoming Congruent and Referencing To further refine the articulation of the process of referring to the felt sense, we need to integrate the role of the therapist into this process. In another presentation, the second author (Ikemi, 2000) proposed that the felt sense should be considered as a verb, rather than a noun. The felt sense is existence, a living in a situation. The felt sense is a bodily living of situations, including the immediate situation. The interaction in the immediate situation lets one form a felt sense. In many everyday interactions, we do not let the felt sense emerge, nor do we let form a felt sense. If you said, for exam ple, I feel so much pressure and I said, Yeah, me too, lets go out for a few beers. We would probably then sit in a bar and talk and not let the felt sense emerge in us. But what if I said, How does that pressure feel in you? Then, you would probably refer to your pressure and try to explicate from there. The very emergence or nonemergence of a felt sense is already interactional.Therefore, for one to have a felt sense, the interaction with the other needs to be such that one can have a felt sense. We might say that such interactions are characterized by empathy (Rogers), acceptance (Rogers), or reconstituting (Gendlin). The process of the client referring to the felt sense needs the therapist in the interaction to attend to the emergence of the felt sense in the client. Here are some interactional qualities of this relationship. 1. The therapist attends to the clients felt sense. 2. The client refers to her felt sense and explicates. 3. The therapist reflects client expressions so that the client can check the explications with her felt sense and explicate further. 4. The therapist takes in the clients explications and attends to her own felt sense. 5. The therapist may explicate her own felt sense. We designate the whole interactional qualities here as the refer encing process. In this process, the therapist and the client do not exist as separate entities. Becoming congruent is a mutual hap pening between the therapist and the client in which both are tun ing into and explicating from the felt sense.Simple Illustration From a Case We present a simple illustration from a case presented later (Doi, 2001). We call it simple because this kind of interaction, though
not dramatic, is frequently observed in therapy. In it, we show that the client and therapist are not separate entities in which the former is incongruent and the latter is congruent. The act of referring to the direct referent on the part of the therapist results in the process of the client to embark on his process of refer ring to the direct referent and speaking from there. A mutual referencing process is happening here.The client was a man in his mid 20s and had just begun working in a research facility of a major corporation. His problem was that he felt his current job as an engineer was not suited for him. When the therapist first met him, he took a leave of absence from his office because of sleep disorder, depression, and anxiety and was eager to switch to a different job that really suited him.During the first five sessions, the client repeatedly insisted that his current job was not right for him because he did not have the capabilities that were demanded by his job in engineering R&D. The client was very talkative; however, he did not seem to touch down inside nor did he appear to refer to his direct referent. The therapist asked the client to feel inside for his felt sense of the situ ation, and she also reflected the feelings the client expressed. How ever, the client kept repeating that he had no capability. He was going around in circles. Whenever the therapist asked him how he felt about the whole thing, he answered, Its difficult to explain, and did not go much further. The therapy seemed blocked.In the relationship with this client, the therapist was unable to understand what was really annoying for the client, even after five sessions. The therapist had been trying to find out what was it that made him so upset that he should consider leaving his job. In other words, the therapist felt incongruent, which made her uneasy. In the sixth session, the client again remarked that he did not want to return to the same office because he might remember the bad feelings and bad atmosphere. T (Therapist): What was it about the atmosphere that made you feel bad? (Long silence) C (Client): Its difficult to explain...Maybe I dont have the right capa bility, or the job is not right for me. This was the answer that had been repeated many times. The therapist still did not understand. T: You said you might remember the bad atmosphere. What kind of at mosphere was that?C: Bad atmosphere . . . maybe others dont find it so bad. T: (Persistently) But it was bad for you, wasnt it? Can you let me un derstand what the atmosphere was that made you feel bad? (Silence again) Was it too quiet?C: No, it was not like that. T: Were other people too absorbed in their work? C: Absorbed in work...Well, it wasnt easy for me to ask silly ques tions.Here was a whole new view of the problem. It was not that
he had no capability. He felt foolish to ask questions and did not want to bother others with silly questions. Despite this, however, the company gave him difficult research objectives, and he felt over loaded and isolated. The therapist finally understood what was so tough about the job for him.After the sixth session, the therapy process was changed. Instead of the blocked process in the first five sessions in which the client did not touch down inside, the client gradually expressed his feelings after the sixth session, and the topic was changed from the persistent topic of not having capability to how to communicate with others. In this simple case, we would like to show that it was the thera pists uneasiness of not understanding, in other words, the thera pists direct referent that was first explicated. More exactly, let us trace the interaction according to the five step qualities shown previously.1. The therapist attends to the clients felt sense. Clients felt sense is not expressed. 2. The client refers to his felt sense and explicates. Client does not refer to his felt sense. 3. The therapist reflects client expressions so that the client can check the explications with her felt sense and explicate further. Re flection does not function in explication because the felt sense is not formed.4. The therapist takes in the clients explications and attends to her own felt sense. The therapist feels uneasy that there is some thing there that she is not understanding.5. The therapist may explicate her own felt sense. Therapist per sistently expresses that she is not understanding and gives exam ples from her own felt sense of the situation (e.g., Was it too quiet?)From there on, the client gradually began to speak from the situ ation as he felt it. His intellectual evaluation that he had no capa bility diminished. He gradually started to work on how tense he felt about asking questions and how he felt trenched in from the attacks coming from his boss. He was getting in touch with his feel ings, referring to them and explicating from there. The therapist continued staying with his process in the interactional qualities 1 through 5 shown previously.It is not as if the client took off the mask (Rogers, 1961) and admitted his fears of asking silly questions after he perceived the empathy and acceptance of the therapist. This process can better be explained by mutual referencing process. THE PROCESS OF REFERENCING AND HUMANISTIC PSYCHOLOGY This article brings to light several implications that lie at the heart of humanistic psychology. First, we point to the importance of the process of referencing, rather than to particular contents or feelings that are being referred to. We cannot say that if one speaks about personal growth, then we are in humanistic territory, although if one speaks about the oedipus complex, then we are in psychoanalytic territory. Distinctions based on contents are mis leading, because spoken contents often change in explication. What was conceived of as a growth direction could turn out to be a regressive fixation. Conversely,