![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 47 to 71 of 71. Go back in thread:
Posted by dj on January 11, 2000, at 0:02:43
In reply to everyone, do the right thing and move on..., posted by juniper on January 10, 2000, at 23:23:15
Juniper,
Don't mistake my condemnation of PM's babbling as a condemnation of him. If some folks think he's a genius that just proves my earlier point about PT Barnum. And if he mistakenly thinks he's a genius because some choose to applaud him, then so be it, but they are doing him a disservice because it only encourages further manic behaviour, instead of treatment. Been there. Bought the book and paid for it, many times.
Frankly I believe it is MORE supportive to challenge someone to take a hard look at what they are doing and writing at times, as has been done to me by your posting. And I do. However my exasperation is as genuine as yours. Sorry if my tone is a bit testy but I call them as I see them. And as the grandson of farmers I have a pretty good nose for BS, which was also sharpened by some pretty damm good education in communications, amongst other things.
Cheerio!
DJ
Posted by jamie on January 11, 2000, at 2:26:04
In reply to Re: everyone, do the right thing and move on..., posted by dj on January 11, 2000, at 0:02:43
You write so clearly dj. I wish I could do that. I understand everyone's position in this thread, but I'm not going to take sides. Your talent with words does deserve mention though.
I cannot understand Phillip's writing at all. Either his IQ or his insanity is way higher than mine. Not sure which. In any case, I just skip his posts now. I asked him once about Dr. Jensen's methods and in a thousand words he told me hardly anything related. He seems more inclined to ramble off-subject than share useful tips.
jamie
Posted by Dr. Bob on January 11, 2000, at 3:43:50
In reply to Re: Phillip Marx...do the right thing, get some help.., posted by dj on January 10, 2000, at 22:28:07
> There's a big gap between genius and babbbling, manic idiocy and unfortunately PM seems to be more in the latter camp...
Now I'm afraid I have to warn you, I don't consider it civil to imply that someone is an idiot. Don't do anything like that again, or I will have to try to block you from posting.
Bob
Posted by CarolAnn on January 11, 2000, at 7:03:03
In reply to Re: warning to dj, posted by Dr. Bob on January 11, 2000, at 3:43:50
Note to Dr. Bob below quoted posts:
> > "There's a big gap between genius and babbbling, manic idiocy and unfortunately PM seems to be more in the latter camp..." dj >
>
> "Now I'm afraid I have to warn you, I don't consider it civil to imply that someone is an idiot. Don't do anything like that again, or I will have to try to block you from posting."
>
> BobDr. Bob,
First, if you knew how terrified I have always been of confronting authority figures(which, in my book you are), you would know how hard this is for me.
Second, I don't really think that dj is talking about Phillip Marx as a person in the above quotes. I think he is refering to the writings, which, given the fact that most psycho-babblers admittedly do not understand what PM is talking about, could legitimately be described as manic idiocy, for which, he could indeed need serious psychological help, which is all dj really seems to be saying. (sorry about run-on sentence)
That said, in a previous post, I stated that I was simply not going to "go there", as far as PM is concerned, but I've found that whether or not his writings are genius or manic idiocy, they are compelling, to say the least.
Please don't ban me from posting for giving a contrary opinion.CarolAnn
Posted by Dr. Bob on January 11, 2000, at 9:16:04
In reply to Re:to Dr. Bob regarding warning to dj, posted by CarolAnn on January 11, 2000, at 7:03:03
> First, if you knew how terrified I have always been of confronting authority figures(which, in my book you are), you would know how hard this is for me.
If you're doing it, does that mean it's getting easier? :-)
> Please don't ban me from posting for giving a contrary opinion.
Contrary opinions aren't the issue, it's how they're presented.
Bob
Posted by Elizabeth on January 11, 2000, at 11:18:57
In reply to Re: warning to dj, posted by Dr. Bob on January 11, 2000, at 9:16:04
> Contrary opinions aren't the issue, it's how they're presented.
Dr. Bob, am I correct in guessing that it wasn't the "manic" part that you had a problem with, but the "idiocy" part? :-)
BTW, kudos to CarolAnn for engaging in some in vivo exposure therapy!
Posted by dj on January 11, 2000, at 13:40:28
In reply to Re:to Dr. Bob regarding warning to dj, posted by CarolAnn on January 11, 2000, at 7:03:03
Citation noted. Having spent about 4 hours straight on-line last night did not help the lucidity of my thinking or communications. In my initial post, last night, and previous postings I have meant to focus my critique on PM's writing and not his character as I attempted to clarify in my second posting last night and other postings. Unfortunately as I didn't carefully reread my posting the critique came across more as a personal attack, which was not my intent, as Carol Ann rightfully perceived.
I do not think PM is an idiot and apologize if that's how some of my comments came off. I do think he is a man, who may have flashes of brilliance obscured by verbal babble which reflects what I assume to be a manic disorder or something along those lines and that if he was to receive proper treatment, instead of encouragement in his semi-lucid rambles, he would hopefully be better able to heighten and sharpen his thinking and expression and hence be more effective as an individual.
My critique also comes from a deeper philosphical concern about what passes for intelligence in our society which has been well documented by Neil Postman(Amusing Ourselves to Death), Jerry Mander (Four Arguments for the Elimination of Television), Warren Bennis & Ian Mitroff (The Unreality Industry : The Deliberate Manufacturing of Falsehood and What It Is Doing to Our Lives).
I have been taught be individuals who were truly brilliant and able to express themselves, simply, clearly, and coherently and they were truly an inspiration (which I think PM might be more so if he could pull it all together) and the issues id-ed in some of the above book were some of the ones we focused on. Part of my training and work experience is in public relations and political studies and part of my concern stems from what I see as the dumb-sizing or our economy and communities that results from the distortions these industries and others (the media) create in our intellectual discourse.
I could go on but I have said more than enough. I will sleep on my views the next time if I think my tone may be off and you can judge me by one of the comments in JFK's inaugaral address where he noted that: "Civility is not a sign of weakness and sincerity is subject to the burden of proof."
Posted by dj on January 11, 2000, at 13:45:12
In reply to Re: everyone, do the right thing and move on..., posted by jamie on January 11, 2000, at 2:26:04
Thanks Jamie! I have lots of training in writing and communications in general and still slip at times. It doesn't come naturally to me, I have to work at it, which is all i am suggesting that PM might consider doing. Generally you and most folks here write very well, except when pharmo-babble is the focus.
> You write so clearly dj. I wish I could do that. I understand everyone's position in this thread, but I'm not going to take sides. Your talent with words does deserve mention though.
>
Posted by juniper on January 11, 2000, at 17:14:22
In reply to Re: everyone, do the right thing and move on..., posted by dj on January 11, 2000, at 0:02:43
dj,
you are a very lucid and thoughtful writer, it shows when you have placed effort and thought into a babble. i look forward to seeing more of these, and i am sure less of sleepless, internet-drunk contrary thoughts on an individual. (and i certainly do not mean sleepless and internet-drunk as derogatory, as it is my state much of the time :)
cheerio to you!
juniper
Posted by sandi on January 11, 2000, at 19:35:11
In reply to Re: KISS, posted by Mrs. G on January 10, 2000, at 20:40:03
> I am fascinated by your posts. Inside that brain somewhere there dwells a genius. Amazing. Good luck to you. What is your occupation (or profession?)
-I assume your reply is directed at PM?--sandi
Posted by Dr. Bob on January 11, 2000, at 23:18:56
In reply to Re:to Dr. Bob regarding warning to dj, posted by dj on January 11, 2000, at 13:40:28
> Citation noted. Having spent about 4 hours straight on-line last night did not help the lucidity of my thinking or communications. In my initial post, last night, and previous postings I have meant to focus my critique on PM's writing and not his character as I attempted to clarify in my second posting last night and other postings. Unfortunately as I didn't carefully reread my posting the critique came across more as a personal attack, which was not my intent, as Carol Ann rightfully perceived.
Thanks for being understanding about this. Please do try to sleep on it next time. Maybe it would be better not to spend so much time online at once?
Bob
Posted by Phillip Marx on January 11, 2000, at 23:53:16
In reply to Re: KISS, posted by sandi on January 10, 2000, at 18:59:25
> > > PM, I enjoy your posts. Who would have thought we'd have a James Joycian poster on the babble. I love all the puns and stream of conscioussness. Like the Yahoo guy yahoo(ed), do we even have the time to read your posts? And like the man said, we don't have to read'em, do we?
> > >
> > > I'm curious as to what your major is at school?
> >
> > Major#444 GI=General Interest (snicker=self paced progress and digress)
> >
> > James Joyce wasn't my call, but they beg for more. The innuendo volleyball relieves tensions, keeping all the "asides" inside is just shortmouth, verbal shorthand. Many have influenced me, but keeping it under 25 pages without disconnecting everything into isolated paragraphs is a joy I'm learning to love.
> >
> > pm
>
> pm,I do enjoy your contributions, however, each time I read one, I come closer and closer to a psychotic break.I wish you just the enjoyment and none of the break. I was never allowed to drift from the scientific center with humor before. Not professional in the profession I was in. I don't do it so "gud" - Oh well.
pm
Posted by Phillip Marx on January 11, 2000, at 23:59:23
In reply to Re: KISS, posted by Mrs. G on January 10, 2000, at 20:40:03
> I am fascinated by your posts. Inside that brain somewhere there dwells a genius. Amazing. Good luck to you. What is your occupation (or profession?)
I wish I could find the genius dwelling somewhere in here.
No profession now. I has been a has-been.
I feel grateful for all the luck providence throws my way. Thanks for the good wishes.
pm
Posted by Phillip Marx on January 12, 2000, at 0:31:35
In reply to Re: Assessing Dr. Jensen's methods, posted by Mrs. G on January 10, 2000, at 20:47:16
> >Phillip said: I haven't given much attention to disorders not mine, but they are in there. Phillip Marx
> > PhilMarx@net999.com
>
> Mrs. G asks: What exactly is your disorder? If you have shared that, I could not find it. Please, tell....Specifically: Insomnia (NOS) and atypical bipolar.
My disorder most annoying (to me, at least) on these threads has been speaking out of originating thread order on past threads. Points questioned were separated from points answered big time. Being too terse was no good, rebound embellishment was worse. Consolidating several answers in a single post generated a ton of wrath.
My self-assessments are in last month's archive as I bragged about how much better I had become. This "forum's" assessments differ substantially. I think 'awake' "is" MUCH better than sedated zombiness. The more awake after all that, the better to me.
Simply: I can't yet sleep without medication after several years. I am using a medication combination that has no hangover. I apparently write in ways that are especially annoying when the medication is in it's first and last half-hour. My self-confidence was destroyed by several years of hopeless helplessness that I am mow rebuilding with great caution and conservativism and many back-up plans. It would take too long and not be worth it to go back to what and where I was (ha, either place). There is a lot I can now do if I can just maintain. I wish myself a lot of luck and am sticking my foot in luck's door to prove it. I don't want that door slamming me in the face again.
pm
Posted by Phillip Marx on January 12, 2000, at 0:37:56
In reply to Phillip Marx...do the right thing, get some help.., posted by Mr. B on January 10, 2000, at 21:09:24
> Alot of vunerable people may mistake you for a cult leader.
>
> Just because someone doesn't make sense, doesn't mean they are a genius.Which "lot" of people are vulnerable and mistaken?
Which cult leader are they mistaking me for?Just because someone doesn't make sense, doesn't mean they are a genius.
True.Just because ?? doesn't make sense, doesn't mean they are a genius, either.
pm
Posted by dj on January 12, 2000, at 0:42:46
In reply to Re: warning to dj, posted by Dr. Bob on January 11, 2000, at 23:18:56
> Maybe it would be better not to spend so much time online at once?
>
> BobActually it's better not to spend so much time on-line, period, as it can be both an addiction and a technique for focusing on other more important issues. And as I am nearing my prime-time maximum limit for the month with my ISP, I have one more incentive to focus my efforts on the paper piles and clutter in my apartment...instead of on-line.
Sante!
DJ
Posted by Noa on January 12, 2000, at 6:17:41
In reply to Re: Time on-line..., posted by dj on January 12, 2000, at 0:42:46
DJ, I am addicted, too. I find myself checking in here at work, which isn't good, and keeps me from doing what I am supposed to do.
Posted by JohnB on January 12, 2000, at 8:41:59
In reply to Re: Time on-line..., posted by Noa on January 12, 2000, at 6:17:41
Yeh, but isn't it great to stop in once in a while and warm ourselves by the campfire?
Posted by Elizabeth on January 12, 2000, at 9:00:07
In reply to Re: Time on-line..., posted by JohnB on January 12, 2000, at 8:41:59
McLean Hospital, the local loony b- -- err, psych hospital, has (get this) a computer addiction treatment program. (At least it's outpatient!) I thought it was pretty funny so I hung the brochure on the door to my room.
Posted by Noa on January 12, 2000, at 12:37:00
In reply to Re: Time on-line..., posted by JohnB on January 12, 2000, at 8:41:59
> Yeh, but isn't it great to stop in once in a while and warm ourselves by the campfire?
-I like the image.
Posted by Phil on January 12, 2000, at 14:53:47
In reply to Re: Time on-line..., posted by Noa on January 12, 2000, at 12:37:00
> > Yeh, but isn't it great to stop in once in a while and warm ourselves by the campfire?
>
> -I like the image.>>When talking about addictions, I love what Richard Pryor said when referring to coke.
"I been doin coke everyday for ten years and I ain't hooked!!"
Posted by Adam on January 12, 2000, at 18:28:39
In reply to internet addiction, posted by Elizabeth on January 12, 2000, at 9:00:07
> McLean Hospital, the local loony b- -- err, psych hospital...
My father was fond of the term "booby hatch" until his son landed in one.
As for internet addiction, I find I'm sucked in sometimes (search engines, esp. Alta Vista and MedLine advanced searches w/ all those funky boolean operators you can throw in) and it's tough to pull away. I've stopped checking during work hours, and I try not to go online after certain hours b/c it's just another insomnia enabler (and I need that like a hole in the head/trepanation). It's weird. Just slip out of the cycle of checking/reward/more checking for less reward, the desire just kind of goes away, or falls to a healthy level. Behavioral therapy has taught me well.
Posted by Phillip Marx on January 14, 2000, at 16:08:24
In reply to Re: internet addiction, posted by Adam on January 12, 2000, at 18:28:39
> > McLean Hospital, the local loony b- -- err, psych hospital...
>
> My father was fond of the term "booby hatch" until his son landed in one.
>
> As for internet addiction, I find I'm sucked in sometimes (search engines, esp. Alta Vista and MedLine advanced searches w/ all those funky boolean operators you can throw in) and it's tough to pull away. I've stopped checking during work hours, and I try not to go online after certain hours b/c it's just another insomnia enabler (and I need that like a hole in the head/trepanation). It's weird. Just slip out of the cycle of checking/reward/more checking for less reward, the desire just kind of goes away, or falls to a healthy level. Behavioral therapy has taught me well.This forum has many that are very aware of brain chemical "touchiness" from and without medicinal effects. The brain-body "approves" of anything that "dithers" it's internal well-being appraisers towards anything greener. This sense-of-internal-approval/improvement craves encores, which affects volitional predispositions. Just for laughs that aren't so funny, search just the chemical effects in the reports you come up with under the following search terms. Please, please, completely ignore the social statistics research that also comes up, look at the hard-cold-reproducible, indisputable laboratory bio-chemical facts only. Aren't those chemicals AWE-Fully familiar?
I use Google.com for super fast searches.
Search:
EMF
EMFRAPIDDO NOT be surprised at what happens to human microchemistry. Put a solar cell in front of your internet monitor screen and hook it up to an oscilloscope and see just what information frequencies you are forcing your brain's visual field of view (FOV) analyzer/interpreters to synchronize to. Be objective. There is a specific APA disorder under which EMF-related suspicions are listed. Don't let your mood get upset and destabilize your medicine-balance. Phobia labels have both pro and con criteria. I wonder where the APA documents UP orders? I'll list it if I stumble across it again. Stick to the instrumented scientific facts and you can avoid being labelled as phobic, maybe.
For nausea regarding R&D integrity, go back afterwards and read the social research. Not many reconciliations of the "facts" will be dead-center between the two extremes is my guess.
pm
Posted by Adam on January 14, 2000, at 21:33:14
In reply to Re: internet addiction, posted by Phillip Marx on January 14, 2000, at 16:08:24
Phillip,You are obviously extremely bright. I found your post to be a bit...opaque, however, and I'm wondering if you could clarify what you have said. I'm not certain how or if it is relevant to internet/search engine addiction. You seem to be suggesting that EM emissions from your computer/CRT can affect mood, and that this might be related to exessive usage (?). You also seem to be concerned about being branded a phobic or luddite type for holding this point of view. Is this correct?
> > > McLean Hospital, the local loony b- -- err, psych hospital...
> >
> > My father was fond of the term "booby hatch" until his son landed in one.
> >
> > As for internet addiction, I find I'm sucked in sometimes (search engines, esp. Alta Vista and MedLine advanced searches w/ all those funky boolean operators you can throw in) and it's tough to pull away. I've stopped checking during work hours, and I try not to go online after certain hours b/c it's just another insomnia enabler (and I need that like a hole in the head/trepanation). It's weird. Just slip out of the cycle of checking/reward/more checking for less reward, the desire just kind of goes away, or falls to a healthy level. Behavioral therapy has taught me well.
>
> This forum has many that are very aware of brain chemical "touchiness" from and without medicinal effects. The brain-body "approves" of anything that "dithers" it's internal well-being appraisers towards anything greener. This sense-of-internal-approval/improvement craves encores, which affects volitional predispositions. Just for laughs that aren't so funny, search just the chemical effects in the reports you come up with under the following search terms. Please, please, completely ignore the social statistics research that also comes up, look at the hard-cold-reproducible, indisputable laboratory bio-chemical facts only. Aren't those chemicals AWE-Fully familiar?
>
> I use Google.com for super fast searches.
>
> Search:
>
> EMF
> EMFRAPID
>
> DO NOT be surprised at what happens to human microchemistry. Put a solar cell in front of your internet monitor screen and hook it up to an oscilloscope and see just what information frequencies you are forcing your brain's visual field of view (FOV) analyzer/interpreters to synchronize to. Be objective. There is a specific APA disorder under which EMF-related suspicions are listed. Don't let your mood get upset and destabilize your medicine-balance. Phobia labels have both pro and con criteria. I wonder where the APA documents UP orders? I'll list it if I stumble across it again. Stick to the instrumented scientific facts and you can avoid being labelled as phobic, maybe.
>
> For nausea regarding R&D integrity, go back afterwards and read the social research. Not many reconciliations of the "facts" will be dead-center between the two extremes is my guess.
>
>
>
> pm
Posted by Phillip Marx on January 15, 2000, at 1:21:40
In reply to Re: internet addiction, posted by Adam on January 14, 2000, at 21:33:14
I think that EMF data is worth keeping in a bin for suspiciously relevant data. The case is still building, not fraying. See what you think after browsing the chemistry reports. I am very unafraid of most future R&D (Luddism), except for genetic research controls and displaced flora and fauna. My occupation for years was as a future products cheerleader, sort of. Everyone should be afraid to try to discuss the EMF effects with people who haven't read the scientific side of the research.
People who don't know the case think you haven't a case and so label you. Unless you feel like reading it all to them, no discussion will be fruitful that is short of data synchronization.
pm
>
> Phillip,
>
> You are obviously extremely bright. I found your post to be a bit...opaque, however, and I'm wondering if you could clarify what you have said. I'm not certain how or if it is relevant to internet/search engine addiction. You seem to be suggesting that EM emissions from your computer/CRT can affect mood, and that this might be related to exessive usage (?). You also seem to be concerned about being branded a phobic or luddite type for holding this point of view. Is this correct?
>
>
> > > > McLean Hospital, the local loony b- -- err, psych hospital...
> > >
> > > My father was fond of the term "booby hatch" until his son landed in one.
> > >
> > > As for internet addiction, I find I'm sucked in sometimes (search engines, esp. Alta Vista and MedLine advanced searches w/ all those funky boolean operators you can throw in) and it's tough to pull away. I've stopped checking during work hours, and I try not to go online after certain hours b/c it's just another insomnia enabler (and I need that like a hole in the head/trepanation). It's weird. Just slip out of the cycle of checking/reward/more checking for less reward, the desire just kind of goes away, or falls to a healthy level. Behavioral therapy has taught me well.
> >
> > This forum has many that are very aware of brain chemical "touchiness" from and without medicinal effects. The brain-body "approves" of anything that "dithers" it's internal well-being appraisers towards anything greener. This sense-of-internal-approval/improvement craves encores, which affects volitional predispositions. Just for laughs that aren't so funny, search just the chemical effects in the reports you come up with under the following search terms. Please, please, completely ignore the social statistics research that also comes up, look at the hard-cold-reproducible, indisputable laboratory bio-chemical facts only. Aren't those chemicals AWE-Fully familiar?
> >
> > I use Google.com for super fast searches.
> >
> > Search:
> >
> > EMF
> > EMFRAPID
> >
> > DO NOT be surprised at what happens to human microchemistry. Put a solar cell in front of your internet monitor screen and hook it up to an oscilloscope and see just what information frequencies you are forcing your brain's visual field of view (FOV) analyzer/interpreters to synchronize to. Be objective. There is a specific APA disorder under which EMF-related suspicions are listed. Don't let your mood get upset and destabilize your medicine-balance. Phobia labels have both pro and con criteria. I wonder where the APA documents UP orders? I'll list it if I stumble across it again. Stick to the instrumented scientific facts and you can avoid being labelled as phobic, maybe.
> >
> > For nausea regarding R&D integrity, go back afterwards and read the social research. Not many reconciliations of the "facts" will be dead-center between the two extremes is my guess.
> >
> >
> >
> > pm
This is the end of the thread.
Psycho-Babble Medication | 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.