Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Interactive Psychology?

Expand Messages
  • Dick.
    Interactive Psychology? This is quite an old private communication, or a part of it, which some might be interested in. It is just as applicable today, if not
    Message 1 of 1 , Nov 30, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      Interactive Psychology?



      This is quite an old private communication, or a part of it, which some
      might be interested in. It is just as applicable today, if not more
      so....



      [ I read your paper on interactive psychology and you refer to all
      anomalous and esoteric experience as psychology within a branch of
      phenomenology. An area which I find very interesting is that of how such
      people of enhanced and altered states of consciousness relate to the
      world and society around them. It seems to be a common practice that
      they stand aloof of it to a large extent, and perhaps adopt an
      isolationist attitude and life style; or what some might call a recluse
      or hermits way of life. Yet you do not recommend this at all, and hence
      an interactive psychological approach; and which seems to be different
      and new. M.T.]



      I refer to all inward experience and the things found there as
      Psychology, and which it is; the study and analysis of the psyche,
      meaning spirit soul and mind in more conventional terms. It is not the
      study of the `out there' or objectivity. But I also recommend
      the study of the `out there' and a study of the relationship
      between the observer and the observed. Thus an Interactive Psychology. A
      Holistic approach. There is no such branch of academic Psychology. There
      is nothing which even comes near to it. As for behaviourism then they
      don't even ask as to what is doing the behaving. They don't ask
      "What am I". It is a taboo subject.



      But as for an approach to living one's life, or a life style, then I
      have always been the same. There was no sudden change due to this or
      that. As for the thought of being reclusive then that notation abhors
      me. There is me, and irrespective of all the stuff in there, and there
      is the `OUT THERE', the world and society. Hence the observer
      and the observed. I take it as I find it and live it that way. There is
      nothing complicated about it, and as I say, I enjoy the world. But as
      to whether this is really new or not then I would doubt that very much.
      But it is certainly not talked about and written about much is it. But
      yes, a good many people do seem to negate the inner; while a good number
      seem to negate the outer. But there are BOTH.



      If people want to call folks of this esoteric type such as you and me,
      as being odd or `mystics' while they themselves are still into
      gods and monsters then fine, I don't care. But none the less they
      have got to live among what they find. The inner AND the outer. As to
      what the OUTER actually IS when it is not being observed then that is
      another mystery isn't it. Finding the absolute nature of the Inner
      is far easier than finding the absolute nature of the Outer; because
      that is what I am. And the mystic knows what it is like when the outer
      is gone. But it does not stay gone. And what would the inner be like if
      the inner was gone? :- ) But the outer is equally as mysterious as is
      the inner. Good luck in your studying it all. I certainly enjoyed it.
      If living life was not enjoyable then there would be no point to living
      it would there. As for the modern paradigm and cult of materialism than
      that will fade away.



      Dick Richardson







      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.