Our alleged violent nature...

photo on Anna Luise Kirkengen.

Have skimmed the interview with Bruce Perry, the interviewer posed a question:

"Understanding and modifying our violent nature will determine, in large part, the degree to which we will successfully adapt to the challenges of the future -- the degree to which future generations of human beings can actually experience humanity. 'What do you mean by 'humanity' in this case?'"

I don’t think we are born with a violent nature… Not born with an urge to destruction - self destruction… See what Miller thinks about Melanie Klein.

Another question/wonder: why not all abused develop criminality for instance… I think it is as Miller is saying that some children are fortunate to meet an enlightened, compassionate, knowing witness, who helps the child (even the very small child) to process what it endured in different degrees, and hence what sort of problems later and their severity!!? We are all exposed to those things, but of different degrees, thus our blindness and insensitivity to these things an degrees of it. Some are more sensitive, others less...

Addition in the evening: blaming our/the nature... (what Bosch calls the Primary defense).

"You know , it's his nature (the human nature)!"

An explanation to children, why their father... Nothing we can do anything about, have to accept. But the environment has to deal with and accept, they have to change, for if they didn't - what then? Accept and/or need to control. Depending who it is about?? (the ones with less power as to accept? And control their impulses, urges, feelings, reactions??).

Came to think about defenses too... Strengthened instead of the opposite in therapy too many times!!? See once again Bosch on Daniel Goleman... As she writes:

“The reader should be aware that many of the ideas on emotional development put forward in Mr. Golemans book are contrary to PRI [Past Reality Integration therapy] ideas. In PRI it is not considered as desirable for young children to control their ‘socially undesired’ emotions or feelings such as fear and anger. When this sort of behaviour is desired by adults of children PRI regards it as poisonous pedagogy /…/ Also, many of the behaviors that are considered by Mr. Goleman to be essential elements of ‘emotional intelligence’, are considered by PRI to be defenses (False Hope and False Power Denial of Needs) employed in order to avoid feeling pain. The general profile of Golemans ‘emotionally intelligent’ person fits the PRI idea of someone who is quite defensive, albeit in a socially desirable way. This might therefore lead to social success, while simultaneously sacrificing contact with the True Self and inner autonomy.”

I think she is right...

The Norwegian physician Anna Luise Kirkengen has come with a new book "Forstyrret barn - forstyrret liv" ISBN: 9788274191211 which translated is something in the style "Destroyed Child - Destroyed Life".

Göran Greider i ledare idag "Mer ögonkontakt i nya aktuellt!" Där står bland annat detta (intressant!!!):

"Redaktionen skulle i expertfrågan faktiskt kunna bryta litet ny mark genom att skifta över tyngdpunkten från de senaste tjugo årens obligatoriska ekonomer och statsvetare - till sociologer, antropologer och inte minst naturvetare. I all media finns ett statsvetaröverskott. [min kursivering]."

Sant!!?? Andra perspektiv vore intressanta!!

In a leader today the leader writer commented changes in a news-program in Swedish TV. He thought the main point (center of gravity!!!?) from the last two decades compulsory economists and political scientists - to sociologists, anthropologists and not least nature scientists as experts in the news-programs, I thought that sounded interesting!!! Then I would listen with much more interest!!! Getting other perspectives on things!!!!

Peter Hultkvist om ”När egoismen får vetenskapens skepnad....”:

”Så var vi där igen. Högerns tro på det ödesbundna i att fattiga förblir fattiga exponeras. Ökade klyftor anses som något närmast oundvikligt. Ett samhälle med små skillnader är omöjligt. Det är slutsatsen i en rapport från Studieförbundet Näringsliv och Samhälle, SNS.

Jag känner igen tongångarna. Så länge arbetarrörelsen har strävat efter en ökad jämlikhet har högern kritiserat det som ett i princip omöjligt projekt. Stämningsläget har varit i stil med att 'naturlagarna går inte att ändra'.

Låglönesatsningar och högre ersättningsnivåer i socialförsäkringarna är inget som är aktuellt enligt SNS. Självfallet kan detta vara en del av de åtgärder som måste vidtas. Satsningarna på lönerna inom vårdyrkena i den offentliga sektorn måste fortsätta. Sedan leder det inte till några fler jobb att straffa arbetslösa med lägre ersättningar."

Och här om ”Nygammal politisk propaganda”.