![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 33 to 57 of 57. Go back in thread:
Posted by Toph on October 14, 2004, at 16:34:57
In reply to A physician's moral indifference to peer opinions, posted by Mary_Bowers on October 13, 2004, at 14:23:22
Please don't misunderstand me, I like this place, but I'd like to know more about the PB mission. I have always been curious about Bob's book. Has anyone read it? Does he propose in the book that Psycho Babble is a place where one can receive psychological threatment? I believe that it is therapeutic for me to be able to speak freely about issues related to my illness. But, is therapy a secondary benefit of support or one of the creator's actual goals? Also, what is the research to which other posts refer?
-Toph
Posted by Dr. Bob on October 14, 2004, at 21:46:24
In reply to Re: A physician's moral indifference to peer opinions » Mary_Bowers, posted by alexandra_k on October 13, 2004, at 20:12:48
> your credibility is questionable.
>
> You seem more intent on making accusations.
>
> your accusatory manner.I appreciate the support, so I'm sorry that I also need to ask you not to post anything that could lead others to feel accused.
If you or others have questions about this or about posting policies in general, or are interested in alternative ways of expressing yourself, please see the FAQ:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#civil
Follow-ups regarding these issues, as well as replies to the above post, should of course themselves be civil.
Thanks,
Bob
Posted by Dr. Bob on October 14, 2004, at 21:47:37
In reply to Re: A physician's moral indifference to peer opinions, posted by Toph on October 14, 2004, at 16:34:57
> Does he propose in the book that Psycho Babble is a place where one can receive psychological threatment?
> I believe that it is therapeutic for me to be able to speak freely about issues related to my illness. But, is therapy a secondary benefit of support or one of the creator's actual goals?
It depends what you mean by "therapy". The goals of this site are support and education. And one of the goals of support and education is to help people feel better. If they do feel better, would you say the site was "therapeutic"? Would you say I was their "therapist"?
I do think someone could be a group therapist and provide group therapy online, but that's not what I do here.
> Also, what is the research to which other posts refer?
See:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/research.html
Bob
Posted by Shadowplayers721 on October 15, 2004, at 0:36:25
In reply to A physician's moral indifference to peer opinions, posted by Mary_Bowers on October 13, 2004, at 14:23:22
Posted by Toph on October 15, 2004, at 9:26:25
In reply to Re: therapy, posted by Dr. Bob on October 14, 2004, at 21:47:37
> > Does he propose in the book that Psycho Babble is a place where one can receive psychological threatment?
>
> > I believe that it is therapeutic for me to be able to speak freely about issues related to my illness. But, is therapy a secondary benefit of support or one of the creator's actual goals?
>
> It depends what you mean by "therapy". The goals of this site are support and education. And one of the goals of support and education is to help people feel better. If they do feel better, would you say the site was "therapeutic"? Would you say I was their "therapist"?
>
> I do think someone could be a group therapist and provide group therapy online, but that's not what I do here.
>
Thanks for clarifying this. Though not by intent or design I do think there is a group threrapeutic dynamic that operates here. And, no, I don't think of you as a therapist, rather someone who fosters a safe, supportive, informative and, yes, therapeutic environment.Being careful not to overly idealize you, I have appreciated how available you have been to my questions lately.
-Toph
Posted by Miss Honeychurch on October 15, 2004, at 10:17:49
In reply to A physician's moral indifference to peer opinions, posted by Mary_Bowers on October 13, 2004, at 14:23:22
I don't understand its purpose! Should this have been funny? What am I not getting here?
Posted by Jai Narayan on October 15, 2004, at 11:41:31
In reply to Dr. Bob, what's your feelings/thoughts on this? (nm), posted by Shadowplayers721 on October 15, 2004, at 0:36:25
Posted by Slinky on October 15, 2004, at 13:41:45
In reply to Re: This is a poor idea of a game » partlycloudy, posted by Slinky on October 14, 2004, at 10:02:51
..and that all posts posted be deleted immediately.
I was and am serious about never EVER posting..and I needed attention.
With only a few loved ones here left who worship me I will sit and suck my thumb...remembering how great I once was.
no bunny
Posted by tabitha on October 15, 2004, at 14:18:40
In reply to Request that slinky never posts to me EVER, posted by Slinky on October 15, 2004, at 13:41:45
> no bunnyOh, now that's just cruel. No dessert for you, missy!
Posted by Jai Narayan on October 15, 2004, at 15:54:55
In reply to Request that slinky never posts to me EVER, posted by Slinky on October 15, 2004, at 13:41:45
Posted by gardenergirl on October 15, 2004, at 21:55:02
In reply to A physician's moral indifference to peer opinions, posted by Mary_Bowers on October 13, 2004, at 14:23:22
Posted by Dr. Bob on October 16, 2004, at 4:45:48
In reply to Dr. Bob, what's your feelings/thoughts on this? (nm), posted by Shadowplayers721 on October 15, 2004, at 0:36:25
> what's your feelings/thoughts on this
I think that getting in the way of our primary task of support and education are some "fight-flight" group dynamics:
> The feelings ... are ... hate in the case of the fight-flight group... The fight-flight group accepts for its leader whoever might lead it to run away from or attack an object or group that is hated or feared
>
> http://www.geocities.com/bhagat266/b/groupdynamics121399.htmlSome previous discussion:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20020627/msgs/6668.html
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20020725/msgs/6719.htmlBob
Posted by Dinah on October 16, 2004, at 7:22:47
In reply to Re: dynamics getting in the way of support, posted by Dr. Bob on October 16, 2004, at 4:45:48
Don't you think it might be difficult to address the outward behaviors of the group without addressing the underlying feelings? Which in this case might be fear of losing an object to which individuals may be attached. aka Babble.
Or as I ask my therapist. "But how will this affect meeeeee?"
(Speaking only as my own selfish self of course.)
Posted by Jai Narayan on October 16, 2004, at 10:29:16
In reply to Re: dynamics getting in the way of support, posted by Dr. Bob on October 16, 2004, at 4:45:48
I see what you mean about the flight/fight dynamic getting in the way of support.
The post by Mary Bowers generated for me "fear of loss" of the site.
That fear (akin to hate?) activated my desire to defend the site and you Dr. Bob.
My actions/reactions to continue to get what I want: the site to continue unimpeded.
And yet the introduction of fear (flight/fight) in fact brought into play the very thing I was fighting and set up: an impediment.
all of which took me off task: support.very interesting article. I copied it to reread later.
I have been involved with groups all my life and find this article fascinating.Dr. Bob, I had wanted to follow the other two articles but they didn't connect to the link.
thanks
It's always interesting here on babble.
Jai
Posted by Dr. Bob on October 16, 2004, at 15:57:23
In reply to I'm afraid I don't understand » Dr. Bob, posted by Dinah on October 16, 2004, at 7:22:47
> Don't you think it might be difficult to address the outward behaviors of the group without addressing the underlying feelings? Which in this case might be fear of losing an object to which individuals may be attached. aka Babble.
Good point, feelings like that are natural. I'll continue to do what I can to keep Babble going -- and to welcome input. And I think support and education will be more productive than fight or flight.
Bob
Posted by Fi on October 16, 2004, at 17:16:40
In reply to Re: underlying feelings, posted by Dr. Bob on October 16, 2004, at 15:57:23
My understanding is that Dr Bob provides the situation/environment where we can share ideas and feelings etc. That includes giving it a context (the website doesnt say 'this is somewhere all Star Trek fans can discuss their favourite episode!'). Then having a role in helping to keep it safe by reminding people when they arent being civil etc.Otherwise, we are responsible for the content and how the boards are used. How and what we share is up to us.
Its good that Admin has its own board, and I suspect this will always be somewhere that people challenge any boundaries that are set, or perceptions. Real or assumed (people bring with them their expectations of bulletin boards, doctors, authority figures, support, psychiatrists etc etc). Joys of transference and projection! And some of the problems between posters get discussed. As well as future ideas and other admin.
As far as I know, Dr Bob's professional expertise means that none of this comes as a surprise, nor is he likely to take flight as a result. I think someone was worried about that? He has a load of patience with keeping the boards going for years. And his professionalism would also mean he would give us all lots of notice if he did have a mid-life crisis, and decide to become a surfing instructor in California instead!
(Sorry if I have misunderstood-I havent read all the postings in this thread- its late and I am also aware my phone bill is ticking up!)
Fi (getting distracted by the idea of California and sea and sunshine!)
Posted by Dinah on October 16, 2004, at 17:18:51
In reply to Re: underlying feelings, posted by Dr. Bob on October 16, 2004, at 15:57:23
> I'll continue to do what I can to keep Babble going -- and to welcome input.
Thanks Dr. Bob. You are a better man than I. Or at the very least, you have tons of intestinal fortitude.
Posted by alexandra_k on October 17, 2004, at 3:42:59
In reply to Re: please be civil » alexandra_k, posted by Dr. Bob on October 14, 2004, at 21:46:24
> > your credibility is questionable.
> >
> > You seem more intent on making accusations.
> >
> > your accusatory manner.Sorry. I thought the first was okay because I quoted the paragraph that led me to conclude that. I thought that that provided good grounds for the conclusion, but would 'this is the phrase that led me to conclude your credibility...' have been better?
In terms of the 'accusation' stuff. I didn't mean to 'accuse' her of being accusatory; I was just reporting on what I took to be a fact after reading her post in which she made a number of accusations.
Perhaps seeing the post as accusatory is more my idiosyncratic judgement rather than what the majority took from the post?
Suggested rephrasings most welcome.
Sometimes it is hard to think of them,
But if one cannot then one is left
either keeping ones opinion to ones self
or with civility warnings.Yours respectfully.
Posted by Dr. Bob on October 18, 2004, at 8:54:15
In reply to Re: please be civil - little help. » Dr. Bob, posted by alexandra_k on October 17, 2004, at 3:42:59
> > > your credibility is questionable.
> > >
> > > You seem more intent on making accusations.
> > >
> > > your accusatory manner.
>
> Suggested rephrasings most welcome.How about something like:
1. Simply:
> That was the paragraph that really stood out in my mind.
2. I would feel accused by your post.
3. Simply:
> and perhaps one that you are more in synch with.
Thanks for your work on this,
Bob
Posted by alexandra_k on October 18, 2004, at 18:07:20
In reply to Re: Suggested rephrasings, posted by Dr. Bob on October 18, 2004, at 8:54:15
Posted by gardenergirl on October 21, 2004, at 1:40:39
In reply to So Mar, not going to reply to my post??? (nm) » Mary_Bowers, posted by gardenergirl on October 15, 2004, at 21:55:02
Posted by alexandra_k on October 21, 2004, at 16:20:55
In reply to Hmmm, is it a royal We? (nm), posted by gardenergirl on October 21, 2004, at 1:40:39
Posted by gardenergirl on October 21, 2004, at 16:28:22
In reply to I wouldn't dare speak for everyone! (nm) » gardenergirl, posted by alexandra_k on October 21, 2004, at 16:20:55
Whoops, I'm sorry. My post was in reply to another post I sent to Mary Bowers which has gone unanswered still. Sorry for the confusion.
gg
Posted by pafaye on November 13, 2004, at 12:44:47
In reply to A physician's moral indifference to peer opinions, posted by Mary_Bowers on October 13, 2004, at 14:23:22
Dear Mary,
I've read your post a number of times along with the respective responses.
It "would appear" that if you are a tort attorney, you might find a more receptive group in the areas of tobacco or weight reduction meds.
I am brand new to the site and although I could spend the time to answer as eloquently as many of the other responders; your rambling leaves me with little more than a recollection of the old joke:
"What are 100 lawyers at the bottom of the ocean?" - "a good start"
Now, Mary, please refer to my comment above as to the fact that this IS A "JOKE." I didn't write the joke and I am hardly threatening your life - lol Don't want you coming after me with a charge of threatening bodily harm!
Seems like you have way too much time on your hands.
p
Posted by Dr. Bob on November 13, 2004, at 15:22:36
In reply to Re: A physician's moral indifference to peer opinions, posted by pafaye on November 13, 2004, at 12:44:47
> your rambling
>
> Seems like you have way too much time on your hands.Please don't post anything that could lead others to feel accused or put down.
If you or others have questions about this or about posting policies in general, or are interested in alternative ways of expressing yourself, please see the FAQ:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#civil
Follow-ups regarding these issues, as well as replies to the above post, should of course themselves be civil.
Thanks,
Bob
This is the end of the 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.