![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 208 to 232 of 257. Go back in thread:
Posted by alexandra_k on December 12, 2010, at 21:45:55
In reply to Re: real relationships vs. transference...., posted by alexandra_k on December 12, 2010, at 21:33:37
I was looking for one in particular but decided NOT to get bogged down in an archive search.
Am I the only one who came to view the whole 'small board' discussion as a process group (content irrelevant - changes ain't gonna happen) to process peoples feelings of exclusion in the past?
What gives him the right to do this?
Why do posters give him permission?
Why engage with him at all?
What the f*ck ethics board allows him?
Posted by twinleaf on December 12, 2010, at 21:52:25
In reply to Re: real relationships vs. transference...., posted by alexandra_k on December 12, 2010, at 21:33:37
Hi Solstice,
I can remember about half a dozen clear examples, similar to the one Alex just gave. To actually find them, though, I would have to search the archives for the last several years. I don't have time to do that right now, but, if it would be helpful, I could do it in January.
While we are on this general topic, there seemed to me to be two responses which occurred with some regularity. The first was the one we have been discussing - having one's thoughts and feelings labelled as transference-based. The second was a pattern of distortion; the response would be to a problem or question which had not being discussed by the poster, or would be to the original problem, but after it had been re-interpreted to mean something entirely different from the poster's original intention. These two ways of responding had the effect of steadily increasing tensions, when they could have been readily defused by genuinely attuned responses.
Posted by Solstice on December 12, 2010, at 22:01:16
In reply to Re: real relationships vs. transference...., posted by alexandra_k on December 12, 2010, at 21:33:37
>
> > Twinleaf - - it would be helpful to me to have a better picture of incidents you're referring to. I'm not suggesting they haven't happened.. I just may not have been attuned to them when they did. Do you have any links or anything where I could see Bob doing this?
>
>
> fun fun, oh what fun, where do we begin?
>
> here's one:
>
> > A lot of the activity here does get focused on my use of power. Maybe it makes some of you feel the way you did when you were a child.
>
> from: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20101014/msgs/971715.html
eegads.. yeah I have seen that stuff. and it Does feel condescending.but.. maybe it's also a reflection of his training and work becoming embedded in his thinking. I know that my traning and work is embedded in how I relate to people. So maybe he doesn't intended it to feel like it feels? I don't know a whole lot about what he does at the University of Chicago. Is Bob a professor only - or does he also treat patients? That could play a role in how he relates to the community here.
Anyway.. thanks for showing me what Twinleaf was referring to. I do 'get it.'
Solstice.
Posted by Solstice on December 12, 2010, at 22:37:04
In reply to Re: real relationships vs. transference...., posted by twinleaf on December 12, 2010, at 21:52:25
> While we are on this general topic, there seemed to me to be two responses which occurred with some regularity. The first was the one we have been discussing - having one's thoughts and feelings labelled as transference-based. The second was a pattern of distortion; the response would be to a problem or question which had not being discussed by the poster, or would be to the original problem, but after it had been re-interpreted to mean something entirely different from the poster's original intention. These two ways of responding had the effect of steadily increasing tensions, when they could have been readily defused by genuinely attuned responses.I do understand what you're saying. But I'm going to go out on a limb here and wonder aloud. I do think it's possible that Bob's tendency to refer to things here as being transference-based, as annoying as they might be at times, could have underpinnings that make it a little less offensive. First of all - he Is a psychiatrist, with all the eduxcation, training and experience that goes into that. Anybody spending that many years immersed in the world of psychiatry is going to automatically think in certain ways. My professional background is (among other things) in zoning and governmental compliance of commercial properties, along with condemnations and Departments of Transportation. I know so much about how roadways come to be - all the details - traffic signals, left hand turn lanes, dedicated right-hand turns, continuous left turn lanes.. everything. know all kinds of stuff about parking requirements at commercial properties - signage - setbacks - drainage - utilities - landscaping. I know the 'rules' for distances between commercial property ingress & egress and traffic signals - all kinds of inane stuff that most people don't spend one second of their time considering. I can't drive anywhere without noticing that stuff though. It's ingrained in my thinking. A while back I had gone on a business trip with a marketing genius. He sat in the window, and started his evaluation of the market from the plane! When we got to the town we were evaluating - we went through stores. He could walk thru a grocery store and tell me precisely how much money that store generated and where that store ranked in sales. This guy noticed EVERYthing. I would have never been able to figure out what came second nature to him to just know. Likewise, when we sat down with the town's Council and local business men, they thought we knew everything. Compared to them, we did know a lot about our areas of expertise - and they relied on us to guide them through some difficult decision making that had to be done. But we lived, breathed and ate the expertise we had. It was our frame of mind. My cohort noticed everything about marketing and demographics. I noticed everything about jurisdictional zoning & governmental compliance integrity.
I think it probably works similarly with Bob. He notices things that we, as a rule, may just not notice. It can feel real personal, though - because we haven't asked him to notice whether our reaction to something he's done is marking a sensitivity based on our early relationships with authority figures. It's such common thinking to him, though - that he just talks about it like I might go on and on about how poorly designed the roadways are at a commercial intersection. To me it's obvious! Others don't notice it - and have little or no interest. So maybe we really do need to cut Bob some slack. He's a psychiatrist - and he thinks like one. He notices things we don't. It makes us uncomfortable when he puts icky names to it that feel so dang personal.. but he may not be doing it to provoke reactions - or even to make us uncomfortable. he may just be stating what is obvious to him. Also - he does know he's talking to a community of mental health-savvy people. It's not like he's speaking Greek here, ya know? He's talking a language we're familiar with.
Anyway.. I just tho't I'd throw that out there. We may be more sensitive to some of his comments than is helpful. We may attribute meaning to it that isn't there.
And I really do think that the healthiest thing to do is to give people the benefit of the doubt... to assume they mean no harm - unless they really show us that they mean harm. And I mean *real* harm.
As far as Bob responding in ways that are odd - I've officially encountered it. :-) I've called him on it. But I don't think he's the only one who does that. I think we all do it from time to time. I think it's just because we all come from so many different life experiences. For cryin' out loud - we come from continents half way around the world from each other! It would be impossible for all the differences between us culturally and life-experience-wise to not affect our communications. So I think we need to be generous with each other - including with Bob.
I hope all that makes sense.
Solstice
Posted by Deneb on December 12, 2010, at 22:39:22
In reply to Re: real relationships vs. transference...., posted by Solstice on December 12, 2010, at 22:01:16
I don't really know what Dr. Bob does exactly, but he worked in the Student Counselling Center at the U of C. I think he saw students.
Now he has a private practice. I am assuming he sees patients.
I think Dr. Bob treats Babblers more like patients than regular people. I don't mind.
Posted by twinleaf on December 12, 2010, at 23:27:43
In reply to Re: real relationships vs. transference...., posted by Solstice on December 12, 2010, at 22:37:04
Well, yes, I do agree that it always helps to understand where the other person is coming from, and to remember that we ourselves have as many blind spots as anyone else. It can be hard to strike the right balance, and I know that I don't always get it right. When I mentioned what appeared to me to be a problematic communication style, I did so because attributing another's thoughts and feelings to transference, or answering a question which has not been asked have the effect of stopping a dialogue altogether. This is obviously far from desirable in someone in an administrative position.
I have been reading your posts and wondering what your profession was- how very interesting!!
Maybe I should say that, like Bob, I am a physician. I am not a psychiatrist, but as part of my training for my own specialty (rehabilitation medicine), I took two years of psychiatric residency training at the New England Medical Center. One of the first things you learn is the importance of clear communication, and of doing your best to clear up even tiny misunderstandings. I'd have to say that the communication style we are discussing, with its deflections and distortions, seems pretty unusual.
Posted by Solstice on December 12, 2010, at 23:28:41
In reply to Re: real relationships vs. transference.... » Solstice, posted by Deneb on December 12, 2010, at 22:39:22
> I don't really know what Dr. Bob does exactly, but he worked in the Student Counselling Center at the U of C. I think he saw students.
>
> Now he has a private practice. I am assuming he sees patients.No longer at U of C?
> I think Dr. Bob treats Babblers more like patients than regular people. I don't mind.I don't think he treats people here like patients at all. Thank goodness. That would be weird.. and probably unethical :-)
Sol.
Posted by Solstice on December 12, 2010, at 23:39:25
In reply to communicating, posted by twinleaf on December 12, 2010, at 23:27:43
> Well, yes, I do agree that it always helps to understand where the other person is coming from, and to remember that we ourselves have as many blind spots as anyone else. It can be hard to strike the right balance, and I know that I don't always get it right. When I mentioned what appeared to me to be a problematic communication style, I did so because attributing another's thoughts and feelings to transference, or answering a question which has not been asked have the effect of stopping a dialogue altogether. This is obviously far from desirable in someone in an administrative position.
>
> I have been reading your posts and wondering what your profession was- how very interesting!!
>
> Maybe I should say that, like Bob, I am a physician. I am not a psychiatrist, but as part of my training for my own specialty (rehabilitation medicine), I took two years of psychiatric residency training at the New England Medical Center. One of the first things you learn is the importance of clear communication, and of doing your best to clear up even tiny misunderstandings. I'd have to say that the communication style we are discussing, with its deflections and distortions, seems pretty unusual.
>
You do make a lot of legitimate points. You don't say anything here that I have an argumemt with.That said - we've got what we've got. Let's do what we can to make it the best place possible for those who need and want to be here.
Solstice
Posted by Deneb on December 13, 2010, at 0:00:58
In reply to Re: real relationships vs. transference.... » Deneb, posted by Solstice on December 12, 2010, at 23:28:41
> > I don't really know what Dr. Bob does exactly, but he worked in the Student Counselling Center at the U of C. I think he saw students.
> >
> > Now he has a private practice. I am assuming he sees patients.
>
> No longer at U of C?I don't know. I've been wondering about that.
> > I think Dr. Bob treats Babblers more like patients than regular people. I don't mind.
>
> I don't think he treats people here like patients at all. Thank goodness. That would be weird.. and probably unethical :-)
>
> Sol.Well it's just he has so many darned boundaries with us! LOL I highly doubt he treats us like his cycling buddies for example.
Oh well. I don't mind. Maybe I like boundaries. Maybe this is why I love him.
Posted by twinleaf on December 13, 2010, at 0:06:47
In reply to Re: communicating, posted by Solstice on December 12, 2010, at 23:39:25
Yes, you are right. Babble means a lot to me, as it does to many others, and we do need to be accepting and supportive of what we have. Dwelling on problem areas tends to make me forget how important that is.
However, any block I get now will be for a year. So in order for me to continue as a regular poster, and not just as an occasional advocate for change here on Administration, I urgently need a more moderate blocking policy to be in place.
Posted by sigismund on December 13, 2010, at 0:50:31
In reply to Re: communicating » Solstice, posted by twinleaf on December 13, 2010, at 0:06:47
>However, any block I get now will be for a year. So in order for me to continue as a regular poster, and not just as an occasional advocate for change here on Administration, I urgently need a more moderate blocking policy to be in place.
We need to get rid of the formula.
Posted by alexandra_k on December 13, 2010, at 3:42:16
In reply to Re: real relationships vs. transference.... » Deneb, posted by Solstice on December 12, 2010, at 23:28:41
> I don't think he treats people here like patients at all.You think he suggests that colleagues and friends who disagree with him are acting from their pathology?
> Thank goodness. That would be weird.. and probably unethical :-)
Indeed.
Has been said before (and not just by 'consumers')
Posted by alexandra_k on December 13, 2010, at 3:44:22
In reply to Re: communicating » Solstice, posted by twinleaf on December 13, 2010, at 0:06:47
> However, any block I get now will be for a year. So in order for me to continue as a regular poster, and not just as an occasional advocate for change here on Administration, I urgently need a more moderate blocking policy to be in place.But that would be to bypass the whole 'and what does a blocking mean to you' process thing. And even if you do get blocked for ages perhaps it will benefit you by helping you to 'move on' (something that was suggested in another thread).
fun and games with - oh i mean for bob.
indeed.
Posted by twinleaf on December 13, 2010, at 7:05:29
In reply to Re: communicating, posted by alexandra_k on December 13, 2010, at 3:44:22
I ceased reading administrative posts addressed to me about two weeks ago because I knew that I would find them very insulting and hurtful. It's a simple matter to do the same with yours.
Posted by Solstice on December 13, 2010, at 11:19:15
In reply to Re: real relationships vs. transference...., posted by alexandra_k on December 13, 2010, at 3:42:16
Alex - you are so much fun to read. You can find needles in haystacks like no one else - and you have a way of turning things on their heads that entertains me endlessly.
> > I don't think he treats people here like patients at all.
>
> You think he suggests that colleagues and friends who disagree with him are acting from their pathology?There are a couple of things here that I'm not sure fit my statement.
Deneb said she thought he treats people here like patients. I said I don't think he does trhat at all. I'm not sure that not treating us like patients = treating us like his friends and colleagues. I think there's an enormous difference between patients, an online bunch of folks you've never met who post on a website forum you created, and ones friends and colleagues. Gosh - I think there's a big difference between friends and colleagues!
Maybe my life experience has characteristics that affect my perceptions. I have two close MD friends who are in the "10 Top Docs" thingy. One is a specialist in infectious diseases (as in third world countries). The other is a renowned psychiatrist whose name I would not want to reveal. He is well-published, and has traveled the world speaking at conferences about the area he specializes in. Weird for me to think about - because I rarely do - but I googled his name while writing this and nearly fell over at the overhwhelming volume of stuff on him. He's quoted everywhere. Weird to remember that he has this professional life. These relationships were forged by our each parenting children with similar disabilities.. in the same school. My kid very close to each of their kids. For 112-13 yrs. now. Lots of intertwining of our lives in a million different ways. My psychiatrist friend and I never talk about his work - but if I have a question about my kid's meds and want what I consider to be the *best* consult - who do you think I discuss it with? The vast majority of the time, though - I am completely out-of-touch with their professional personas. They are both brilliant - Yale/Stanford guys. Waaay smarter than me. Maybe that's why it *works*. I know them as people - and rarely think of 'who' they are professionally. We're just parents of kids with serious issues, and have shared our daily - weekly - yearly struggles coping together. We've shared tears - and we've shared the excitement of our kids' progress that parents of 'typical' kids wouldn't even notice. When we get together for a Memorial Day bar-b-q and I bring the ribs - and my psychiatrist friend grills - and we swim with the kids - and are immersed in the environment we create together - the gentle accommodations we make for the disabilities of each others' kids - we're just some people who have bonded over a painful part of life that we share. My heart is moved by the compassion they show my kid - and I'm guessing that my instinctive compassionate responses to their kids moves them as well. There are no professional achievements (or lack of achievements) that mean anything when you are simply observing another parent taking the time and love to care for your kid - a kid who rarely experiences 'fitting in.' What these guys 'do' (and maybe my comparative lack of achievement) is not easy to remember in those times... because all I see is their relationship with my kid.. and all they see is my relationship with theirs. Everything else pales in comparison.
So my life experience may make it harder for me to be suspicious of MD's in general - including the profession of psychiatry. A close friend of mine happens to be one - one whose name is well known in the field... but to me he's just a friend.
As for Bob - to me he's just a website adminstrator, who is also a psychiatrist, probably a husband, maybe a parent, and likely has plenty of friends that he relies on for support. He will react to to things here from his own life experience - which includes his cultural background, his education, his profession. Just like me. And just like you.
Solstice
Posted by Solstice on December 13, 2010, at 11:25:24
In reply to Re: communicating, posted by alexandra_k on December 13, 2010, at 3:44:22
Twinleaf - - I think Alex was doing a tongue-in-cheek thing here regarding Bob. She's being hard on him here, in her side-ways kinda way of doing that. I don't think what she says here has anything to do with you at all. It may not have occurred to Alex that you might not have seen the thread she's referring to - and as a result she didn't anticipate that you would not know how to interpret it the way she meant it.
I'll leave it to Alex to 'xplain what she meant. :-)
Solstice
>
> > However, any block I get now will be for a year. So in order for me to continue as a regular poster, and not just as an occasional advocate for change here on Administration, I urgently need a more moderate blocking policy to be in place.
>
> But that would be to bypass the whole 'and what does a blocking mean to you' process thing. And even if you do get blocked for ages perhaps it will benefit you by helping you to 'move on' (something that was suggested in another thread).
>
> fun and games with - oh i mean for bob.
>
> indeed.
Posted by alexandra_k on December 13, 2010, at 11:54:22
In reply to Re: hurtful communications, posted by twinleaf on December 13, 2010, at 7:05:29
> I ceased reading administrative posts addressed to me about two weeks ago because I knew that I would find them very insulting and hurtful. It's a simple matter to do the same with yours.
I didn't know that you stopped reading them for that reason or I wouldn't have used Bobisms in a post to you.
Sorry.
Posted by alexandra_k on December 13, 2010, at 11:59:23
In reply to Re: real relationships vs. transference...., posted by Solstice on December 13, 2010, at 11:19:15
> Maybe my life experience has characteristics that affect my perceptions. I have two close MD friends who are in the "10 Top Docs" thingy.Oh. Why didn't you say so before? Well that is it then, you win. Your experiences clearly grant you special insight into the nature of the situation here.
Posted by Solstice on December 13, 2010, at 12:29:27
In reply to Re: real relationships vs. transference.... » Solstice, posted by alexandra_k on December 13, 2010, at 11:59:23
>
> > Maybe my life experience has characteristics that affect my perceptions. I have two close MD friends who are in the "10 Top Docs" thingy.
>
> Oh. Why didn't you say so before? Well that is it then, you win. Your experiences clearly grant you special insight into the nature of the situation here.I think you may have misunderstood. There isn't any 'winning.' And I have insight - but it's not 'special.' It's just mine. And my perceptions of what goes on is influenced by my life experiences - just like yours is influenced by yours. I was trying to provide background into what affects my perceptions.
No offense was meant, and I'm sorry that offense was taken.
I really like you Alex. A lot.
Solstice
Posted by Deneb on December 13, 2010, at 16:10:40
In reply to Re: real relationships vs. transference...., posted by Solstice on December 13, 2010, at 11:19:15
> Deneb said she thought he treats people here like patients. I said I don't think he does trhat at all. I'm not sure that not treating us like patients = treating us like his friends and colleagues. I think there's an enormous difference between patients, an online bunch of folks you've never met who post on a website forum you created, and ones friends and colleagues. Gosh - I think there's a big difference between friends and colleagues!
I'm just think that because of what Dr. Bob tweeted, that is why I brought up the patient thing. He tweeted: "Engage in patient communities like you'd engage a patient in person".
What do you think it means? Maybe I misunderstood his tweet. Maybe engage doesn't mean what I think it means here.
Posted by solstice on December 13, 2010, at 18:32:09
In reply to Re: real relationships vs. transference...., posted by Deneb on December 13, 2010, at 16:10:40
I don`t follow his tweets - but I don`t know, Deneb. I`d be surprised if he meant it like you`re wondering, because I think he`s made it clear that he does Not intend to establish dr/pt dynamics with people here. Maybe he meant that if a psychiatrist is going to walk into a patient community wearing his/her `I am a psychiatrist tag` - then they should be prepared to behave with the same professional integrity that they would hold themselves to in a one-on-one relationship with their own patients. To know for sure what he meant, you`d have to ask him directly.
Solstice
Posted by muffled on December 13, 2010, at 23:25:29
In reply to Re: real relationships vs. transference...., posted by solstice on December 13, 2010, at 18:32:09
> I don`t follow his tweets - but I don`t know, Deneb. I`d be surprised if he meant it like you`re wondering, because I think he`s made it clear that he does Not intend to establish dr/pt dynamics with people here. Maybe he meant that if a psychiatrist is going to walk into a patient community wearing his/her `I am a psychiatrist tag` - then they should be prepared to behave with the same professional integrity that they would hold themselves to in a one-on-one relationship with their own patients. To know for sure what he meant, you`d have to ask him directly.
>
> Solstice*yep, I think thats a one for Bob to answer...
Posted by Dinah on December 14, 2010, at 9:04:47
In reply to Re: some kind of Elders Council, posted by Dr. Bob on December 1, 2010, at 3:39:09
> 5 candidates could run "unopposed". Someone who didn't want to risk running and not being elected could withdraw if a 6th candidate were nominated.
Would you consider these candidates elected or self-appointed (as opposed to Bob-appointed)? Do you think self-appointed candidates would be embraced by the community as "elected"?
For that matter, I haven't noticed in real politics that election leads to a lack of divisiveness. Or that candidates and their supporters, upon losing, feel great confidence in the elected. Or work with them in harmony.
It would certainly be interesting for an observer to see how the dynamics work out. Although, given the current size of Babble, and the small number of people active on Admin, perhaps not as interesting as it would have been a few years ago.
Posted by Willful on December 14, 2010, at 14:31:38
In reply to Re: some kind of Elders Council, posted by Dinah on December 14, 2010, at 9:04:47
One important difference between elections in the so called real world and elections on Babble is that elections in small communities of people who know one another are very different from those in large, fragmented and polarized communities. I would expect there to be much more confidence in people elected here than those in our country at large.
Also, I don't see people who run to be elected to the Council as "politicians" as that word has come to be used pejoratively. We would just be people here who want to help out on blocks and who have the respect and confidence of the community to do so.
Process considerations are terribly important. I don't see people who are elected, even if there aren't a plethora of candidates to be "self-appointed." Anyone who is unhappy with the composition of the candidate slate is free to run. Running may mean giving some idea of how you see the situation here, or perhaps not. How often or how council members would change, and so forth, I'm not sure has been worked out.
But I somehow feel that the process point is very important in the legitimacy of the council. I suppose it if happens, we'll all see how it's accepted.
I also wanted to mention, that even during the facebook problem, Bob not only made it easier to opt out, but in response to poster pressure, put opt out icons on every post. Many of his attempts to respond to our unhappiness are not acknowledged and taken account of. I realize that people are extremely angry about the blocks, which are the one area where his concessions have been limited. But as Solstice has pointed out, even here he has made concessions.
I personally find his questions about peoples' supposed "childhood" reasons for their response to him unhelpful, as they do seem a infantilizing, as if our legitimate objections can be reduced merely to unresolved childhood trauma etc. However, I also believe that too much focus on what seem to be Bob's maladroit way of presenting and handling some issues here-- which I think are not due to ill will but are simply not attuned to our perspective-- are overemphasized. Yes they are disturbing, and sometimes, as in the facebook debacle quite hurtful to Babble. Buts for me, so far, they don't overshadow the importance of the Bob, and Bob's contribution in sponsoring and managing Babble at all.
I don't by the way see Bob as having all the power. Of course, he does have the ultimate ability to run things. Yet within the scope that he leaves free, there is a lot of room for us to make choices about what kind of place this will be, and how we individually and collectively, will shape it.
Willful
Posted by Solstice on December 14, 2010, at 14:57:42
In reply to Re: some kind of Elders Council, posted by Willful on December 14, 2010, at 14:31:38
Wow, Willful. I wish there was a way to ensure everybody reads what you wrote here.
Solstice
> One important difference between elections in the so called real world and elections on Babble is that elections in small communities of people who know one another are very different from those in large, fragmented and polarized communities. I would expect there to be much more confidence in people elected here than those in our country at large.> Also, I don't see people who run to be elected to the Council as "politicians" as that word has come to be used pejoratively. We would just be people here who want to help out on blocks and who have the respect and confidence of the community to do so.
> Process considerations are terribly important. I don't see people who are elected, even if there aren't a plethora of candidates to be "self-appointed." Anyone who is unhappy with the composition of the candidate slate is free to run. Running may mean giving some idea of how you see the situation here, or perhaps not. How often or how council members would change, and so forth, I'm not sure has been worked out.
> But I somehow feel that the process point is very important in the legitimacy of the council. I suppose it if happens, we'll all see how it's accepted.
> I also wanted to mention, that even during the facebook problem, Bob not only made it easier to opt out, but in response to poster pressure, put opt out icons on every post. Many of his attempts to respond to our unhappiness are not acknowledged and taken account of. I realize that people are extremely angry about the blocks, which are the one area where his concessions have been limited. But as Solstice has pointed out, even here he has made concessions.> I personally find his questions about peoples' supposed "childhood" reasons for their response to him unhelpful, as they do seem a infantilizing, as if our legitimate objections can be reduced merely to unresolved childhood trauma etc. However, I also believe that too much focus on what seem to be Bob's maladroit way of presenting and handling some issues here-- which I think are not due to ill will but are simply not attuned to our perspective-- are overemphasized. Yes they are disturbing, and sometimes, as in the facebook debacle quite hurtful to Babble. Buts for me, so far, they don't overshadow the importance of the Bob, and Bob's contribution in sponsoring and managing Babble at all.
> I don't by the way see Bob as having all the power. Of course, he does have the ultimate ability to run things. Yet within the scope that he leaves free, there is a lot of room for us to make choices about what kind of place this will be, and how we individually and collectively, will shape it.> Willful
Go forward in thread:
Psycho-Babble Administration | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.