Placeholder Image

字幕列表 影片播放

  • so we started to talk a little bit about phenomenology last time

  • and about carl rogers

  • and, uh, I mentioned that

  • the phenomenologists

  • were interested in experiences in some sense

  • as the ultimate as the ultimate reality, and that's a very complicated

  • concept to grasp

  • the existentialists

  • also adopted that viewpoint. they were concerned with the

  • the quality of subjective experience,

  • not that they were ignoring

  • the reality of the objective experience

  • but they were concerned with the reality of subjective experience

  • and they were also more focused action than on

  • on statement or belief. because

  • here's something to think aboot

  • you can think about this for a very long time

  • if you're trying to understand what someone believes

  • even if you're trying to analyze their representations of the world

  • if you should pay attention to how they act or what they say

  • and that's a profound question, even from a

  • from a neurological posi-

  • perspective or a neuropsychological perspective, because

  • the memory system, that you use to represent

  • what you say, that you believe, is not the same

  • memory system that you use to embody

  • your knowledge about action

  • so, it's

  • akin to the distinction between

  • telling someone how to ride a bike and knowing how to ride a bike

  • those are not the same things

  • the descriptions don't even lay very well on top of one another

  • because you don't actually know how you ride a bike

  • you just know how to do it. it's built into your physiology, right

  • it's a skill, and

  • that's called procedural memory, and procedural memories

  • are the same kind of memories that

  • that basically structures your perceptions

  • it's not that you can't orient

  • orient your perceptions consciously, you can

  • but once you've oriented them consciously

  • let's say, some goal, it's automatic procedures

  • that take over because you really don't know how that

  • you organize your senses so that you pay attention

  • you just know how to do it

  • now the existentialists believed that

  • actions spoke louder than words

  • and that if you were interested in belief

  • and even if you were interested in

  • analyzing belief that it was better for you to look at how someone acted

  • than what they said. Now

  • one of the things you might think

  • with regards to rogers

  • is that

  • his psychotherapeutic practice

  • would be predicated on the idea that that you should

  • bring how you act into alignment with

  • what you say you believe

  • so that there is no discontinuity between your

  • body, that's one way of thinking about it, and your mind

  • and so that there are fewer paradoxes in your

  • in the way that you manifest yourself in the world

  • so the concentration on action is one of the fundamental

  • characteristics of existentialism

  • another one is

  • the insistence upon

  • trouble and suffering as an intrinsic

  • element of human experience

  • So, you could say that we concentrate

  • Well we could say: "Ok, well built into that is

  • Trouble, built into that is Chaos, built into that is Anxiety

  • and Pain; and Disease.

  • You can fall prey into those things

  • Without there being something wrong with you. Now, if you pin down a psychoanalyst

  • like Jung or Freud

  • They would of course admit that human misery is endemic to

  • human experience, but Freud in particular

  • tended to look for

  • adult psychopathology

  • in childhood misadventure

  • in pathological childhood experience

  • he at least implicitly claimed that

  • If you hadn't experience childhood trauma

  • and you had developed properly what would

  • is that

  • you would end up healthy, roughly speaking

  • certainly, mentally sound

  • but the existentialists don't really buy that belief in the beginning

  • they basically make a different claim which is

  • that Life is so full of intrinsic misery, let's say

  • but suffering is a better way of thinking about it

  • suffering that

  • manifests itself as a consequence of your intrinsic

  • vulnerability, that psychopathology is built

  • into the human experience

  • There's no real way of avoiding it or at least...

  • There's no real reason to look for extra causes

  • that might be a better way of thinking about it

  • and

  • you'd be surprised how often that observation is useful

  • for clinical clients for example

  • because one of the things that is quite characteristic

  • about people, especially if they are introverted and

  • don't have many friends; they don't have people to talk to

  • if they are suffering, maybe they are depressed or anxious

  • or they have some sets of strange symptoms like agoraphobia

  • or obsessive compulsive disorder

  • one of the things that they always presume is that

  • the fact that they are suffering in that manner

  • means that there is not only something wrong with them

  • but something uniquely wrong with them so that

  • it is their fault and no one else is like them

  • and one of the things that you do

  • as a diagnostician; you know, you'll hear a lot of

  • rattling about how labelling is bad for people

  • and

  • certainly myth labelling is bad for people

  • and eve an accurate label can be a box

  • you can get out of, but it is very frequently the case

  • that you diagnose someone, it is a relief to them that you can't believe

  • because they come into you knowing there is something

  • isn't going properly

  • but they think well, they are the only person facing it

  • that it means that they are idiosyncratically strange

  • in some incomprehensible way that no one else can

  • possibly understand

  • and there's no way that they can ever get better

  • the things you do is that you point out to them

  • depression and anxiety doesn't really require any explanation

  • right, there is plenty of reason; I don't remember who said it

  • "everyone has sufficient justification for suicide".

  • I think that was the claim, well the point is that

  • Is that you look through the experiences of the typical person

  • Unless they are very very fortunate

  • and they wont be that way forever that certainly is the case

  • that they can point to traumatic experiences throughout their lives

  • death and loss and illnesses

  • and humiliation and all those sorts of things

  • is sufficient to account for existence

  • in the state of quasi-pemanent negative emotion

  • now often

  • if you see people who are depressed and anxious by nature

  • they assume that everyone else is the smiling face of

  • that you see on facebook

  • and so that alienates themselves from people and from themselves

  • even more than

  • certainly far more than necessary

  • part of the psycho-education that is going on in therapy

  • is merely

  • educated people to understand that

  • a fair bit of misery is the norm and that

  • there is plenty of genuine reason for it

  • and so the existentialists basically start from that stance

  • It's like a 'Fall of Man' stance

  • you know, because (it) is deeply rooted in

  • the Western tradition roughly speaking is the idea that

  • people are divorced from some early

  • paradisal fate

  • and that is the emergence of something like self-consciousness

  • that produced that demolition

  • of humanity and left us in a damaged state

  • and people think they don't believe that

  • but they believe it all the time

  • and it's frequently how people experience themselves

  • as if there is something wrong that needs to be rectified

  • and it seems unique in some sense to human beings

  • it doesn't seem all that obvious that animals think that way

  • but people definitely think that way

  • and so

  • all the existentialists

  • basically take that as

  • a given.

  • and then, they offer another question

  • well, given that is your lot

  • and then, there is ample reason for misery

  • How is that you should conduct yourself? Because merely say

  • giving into that misery or multiplying it,

  • doesn't seem to be

  • it doesn't seem to be doing anything other than multiply it

  • it doesn't seem to be doing anything than increase it

  • "It is bad to begin with it", you might say

  • well increasing it is something you have to regard as worse

  • so how do you conduct yourself in the face of misery?

  • Ok, how do they present that to begin with?

  • Ok so, this is from Pascal,

  • and this is an existential statement

  • that describes the position of the individual in the universe

  • you might say, or you could say

  • it explains a deep

  • characteristic of individual experience,

  • or existence. Hence, existentialism.

  • All he does is he spends his hole trying to make

so we started to talk a little bit about phenomenology last time

字幕與單字

影片操作 你可以在這邊進行「影片」的調整,以及「字幕」的顯示

B1 中級 美國腔

存在主義(2017 Personality 11: Existentialism: Nietzsche Dostoevsky & Kierkegaard)

  • 5 0
    Yip Scott 發佈於 2021 年 04 月 06 日
影片單字