Eric O. Schultz > Recent Status Updates

A bit odd that the vegan people care about Luc's lifestyle choices? Normally that sort of person wouldn't. Which makes it odd that the conservatives at the club didn't seem to care much. Hmmm...

I'm not sure Adlerian psychology is for me. Everything sounds nice but it's too idealistic. Also, it tends to warp reality. As noted in my previous update, denying trauma requires the warping of the experience of trauma bearers. I just came across the section about parents forcing education on their children. They can be doing it for a child's good but in Adlerian Psy it has to only some other selfish motive

Slow going. I really want to like this, but I don't think denying the nature of the world (or the past) is a good way of going through life. In a way this book contradicts the Fuck Feelings book I just read, as it doesn't make space for rationality and reason because it focuses solely on the self and on the autonomous. I think a synthesis is possible, that is more healthy. As it, this work feels toxic.

It's interesting that the author, and by extension, Adler, don't dislike telling stories. If someone is scared to go outside (a shut in), there is no causal story according to the author. And then the author in the voice of the philosopher creates a causal story; the shut in doesn't want to go outside because they want attention of some shit. So he's back to thinking about causes? Adler wasn't much of thinker.

Audio booking this one. I already don't get it. I understand if the argument that looking at causality isn't important for treatment; it's still important however, as truth, no? And shouldn't we think of truth? And why deny it completely? Why is denying the existence of trauma so important?

The rant against social workers is just bizarre.

Who deserves protection? Apparently not everyone, according to this book. It seems as if all victims must be pure. I guess that means children.
Not really enjoying the Fuck Helpfulness chapter. I do like the idea that other people's problems are not yours and that they have to help themselves; you can only encourage from a distance, but can you really be distant in that way from a partner or friend? Not sure.

This might be a DNF. I've been looking at reviews and several people mention this isn't the sort of book you read at once; you should dip in an out. I think this is fair as the book is (1) not very deep while discussing important topics and (2) very repetitive, as in the advice is always the same- don't give into your emotions but act in a calculated fashion that advances your small life. How to get there though?

His argument is that evolution has created different personality types and these survive because of diversity creates a more resilient gene pool (good for the whole population but detrimental to the individual), but often times, those personality types cannot do well in life. He suggests that all personality is innate, and therefore, you are predestined to be who you are. That's why you shouldn't beat yourself up.

I tend to accept reality, so much of what this book has said so far has been my general attitude towards life. What's odd about Bennett's formulation is that you should stick to your values even if you know life is unfair. Why? If life is unfair, values should go out the window, no?

Book is getting gross. I read Just My Type earlier this year. That book clearly stole it's plot from this one.

This book is so boring. I want to DNF. How was this book so popular? It's turned into a list novel; in this book the list revolves around planed segments for their boring podcast. Ughhh!!!

I'm surprised by how boring this book is.

ZZZZZZZZZZ!

The novel has plateaued; everything we learn about Seth and Lana is a repetition of info we got earlier

On Chapter 8. This book started out okay but is quickly turning into a list romance, in which the plot is a bunch of random activities. I don't mind this in theory. I just haven't read a good example yet. Love, Chai, and Other Four Letter Words was the last list romance I read. They tend to be slow.

A bit slow so far, but it has a Gothic feel to it that I can't resist.

Book is getting better: Steiner is connecting scripts to the power structure. I'll be curious to see how he suggests one escapes scripts when one has to live under the white supremacist, capitalist, imperialist patriarchy.

The next part is all theory. I was intrigued because Steiner/Berne were interested in behavior, which they say reflects ego state. This is all learned behavior. So far there is a lot of emphasis of the parental role. What I've learned so far: (1) a parent telling you not to be aggressive makes you gay and (2) naming your child Gigi will make her slutty. Yikes is my only response.

I'll probably read this very slowly. The book starts off as hagiography: a retelling of the life of Eric Berne, born Eric Lennard Bernstein. There's no mention why he changed his name, but he clearly published academically under Lennard Bernstein. Berne's story, at least according to Steiner, is tragic. Apparently he would let people in, so he died of coronary heart disease.

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Why am I doing this to myself?

Has now entered the two star zone.

This book is a chore