Noter Om Positiv VS Negativ Tænkning



En model som differentierer positiv vs negativ i 4 kategorier:



1. Positive former af 'positiv tænkning'
 
2. Negative former af 'positiv tænkning'
 
3. Positive former af 'negativ tænkning'
 
4. Negative former af 'negativ tænkning'
 

Det er mit bud, at nummer 2 og nummer 3 ikke eksisterer på de fleste folks radar.

Ønsketænkning, normalcy bias, konditionering, investeret interesse, er meget større end (>>) reality check.
 


De som kan differentiere mellem alle 4 kategorier, vil derfor vil kunne foretage flere valg i enhver given situation, mens de som kun kan se to former (når der i virkeligheden er mindst 4) tænker i et falskt binært skema, som virkeligheden ikke afspejler. Modellen som følger af enten/eller mister nuancer, opdeler virkeligheden falskt, og kan have dramatiske konsekvenser:

Her er nogle eksempler på  3'eren (positive former af 'negativ tænkning') som blev fejlbedømt som 4'eren (negative former af 'negativ tænkning')  - i sig selv pga. af fiksering på 1'eren og 4'eren - og af samme grund ønsker jeg ikke at være blandt kollektivister når the shit hits the fan (som nogen har sagt;-), ej heller de typer af New Age folk , som  Debbie Ford har kaldt 'the Dark Side of The Light Chasers':





●  "Little Sioux Scout camp in June 2008. Despite being in the middle of "Tornado Alley," the campground had no tornado shelter to offer protection from a strong tornado." Ønsketænkning, investeret interesse, normalcy bias er meget større end (>>) reality check.


● New Orleans before Hurricane Katrina. Inadequate government and citizen preparation and the denial that the levees could fail were an example of denying the 'negative', as were  the thousands of people
who refused to evacuate.


Ønsketænkning, investeret interesse, normalcy bias er meget større end (>>) reality check.


● Members of the Bush administration have repeatedly chided journalists for failing to focus on the positive aspects of America's role in Iraq. The consequence of such positive thinking have been notably highlighted by journalists and commentators.


● Rumsfeld had become one of the chief engines of the notion that insisting on belief in a particular version of reality in Iraq would somehow cause that version to be manifested. It was the power of positive thinking, as applied to geopolitics, and by 2005 it had gone too far for a slew of retired generals, who joined the call for Rumsfeld to resign.


● Clearly the world would never have been exposed to the scandal of Abu Ghraib prison had it not been for whistleblowers. Those with secrets to hide would consider it "positive" that exposure to such "negativity" should be avoided.


●  As a physician concerned with cancer, Jimmie C. Holland (The Human Side of Cancer, 2001) writes with concern on The Tyranny of Positive Thinking and the unreasonable expectations it places on people struggling with the disease -- to the point of believing they are dying because they are not being positive enough.


● Tsunami disaster: A more dramatic example is that of the head of  the Thai meteorlogical office who was forced in 1998 to retire under a shadow for having warned that the coast was dangerously vulnerable to the effects of tsunami. He was accused of scaremongering and jeopardising the tourist industry around the island of Phuket. After tens of thousands of deaths in the tsunami of 2004, he was reinstated in 2005 -- as minister in charge of the Thai disaster warning office.

 


Challenger disaster: NASA suffered a highly publicized disaster on 28 January 1986, when the space shuttle Challenger exploded, killing all seven astronauts on board. The extensive analysis of the problem thereafter determined that the engineers had endeavoured to report the nature of the problem (inadequate sealing rings, called O-rings) to the NASA council responsible. They had however been informed that negative feedback on such matters was both unwelcome and inappropriate. A positive approach was required by NASA authorities to ensure the planned launch and the desirable public relations coverage. Some of the engineers were much sought out thereafter as speakers in management schools.


● Avianca disaster: In 1990 an Avianca flight was in a holding pattern in the New York area for 77 minutes awaiting clearance to land. Realizing that the aircraft's fuel supply was dangerously low, the pilot informed the control tower that it was nearly exhausted: "I think we need priority; we're running out of fuel." Hearing the pilot's calm positive voice, the controllers did not react and authorize an immediate landing. Fatally, the pilot had not used the prescribed "negative" terms "emergency" or "minimum fuel". Minutes later the aircraft crashed. An investigation concluded that the pilot neglected to use the prescribed terms, and the controllers had also failed to ask how much fuel remained, or to request clarification.
- fra meget interessant omfattende filosofisk og avanceret artikel jeg har refereret til mange gange over årene, som giver in-depth analyse af problematikken: Being Positive Avoiding Negativity

Se også:10 simple bedrag i New Age bevægelsen -- Åndens Videnskab




______________________________________________________


PS: Min kritik af positiv tænkning, filmen 'The Secret', m.m. i 2007;


1. The Secret tager ikke højde for fra HVILKET niveau man ønsker sig
fra. The Secret kan altså bruges af både psykopaten eller altruisten,
etc. Som vist satirisk her af Stuart Davis (vildt sjov fætter)
:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dm0fRKiQ7jU

2. The Secret bruger tankerne! Den dybere del af det spirituelle arbejde består i at TRANSCENDERE tankerne, idet tanker selv ikke udgør spiritualitet. At tænke i sprituelle modeller er ikke spiritualitet. Det er et landkort, ikke selve landskabet.

3. Egoet har ikke nødvendigvis visdommen til at ønske sig det, det har
brug for, men kun det som det begærer. Hvis 'egoet' ikke har forbindelse og perception af Natural Law, er dets 'postive tænkning' afsporet!

Derfor ordsproget: pas på med hvad du ønsker dig, for det kan være at du
får det.

Desuden beskytter vores højere selv vort ego fra at få det, som vi ikke
har brug for, men uheld sker. Og derfor, at der i den okkulte skole var advarsler om magi.


4. The Secret tager ikke højde for skyggen, den manglende skyggeintegration (som bl.a. kan være den skjulte årsag til, hvorfor egoet overhovedet ønsker sig de ting som det
gør)

5. "You can have what you want" siger The Secret, positiv tænkning,
magi, etc.

"You can want what you have" siger Byron Katie, Eckhart Tolle, etc. At
acceptere det som er (og derefter får du ofte det du vil (paradoksalt)

En af Byron Katies venner har formuleret det således:

The Secret: "You can have whatever you want."
The Work: "You can want whatever you have."

The Secret: "My will be done. I know what's best for me."
The Work: "Thy will be done (=Thy will is done). What's best for me is
what actually happens."

The Secret: "You can control your thoughts."
The Work: "You are not the thinker"


____________________________


 

Stuart Davis om "The Secret":

 

As with most things, The Secret is a Good news / Bad news scenario.

 

The secret is (partly) true. Our thoughts and feelings are of

consequence, and positive thinking and feeling can significantly

characterize our experience of reality, even influence the way reality

unfolds.

 

The Secret bruger gyldige (men delvise) antagelser såsom:

 

Our thoughts and feelings are powerful

 

Og puster dem op til en kosmisk (og falsk) skala: "Our thoughts are the

most powerful things on Earth"

 

The secret takes a statement like

 

"Thought can influence reality"

 

og forstærker den til : "Thoughts create reality." Not just any

thoughts, but YOUR thoughts.

 

(By the way, are you a rape victim? I guess you created that reality

with your thoughts. Was your family member killed in Iraq? I guessed you

created that experience for yourself so you could learn from it. Wow.

You are one sadistic cat.)

 

The Secret takes a truth like:

 

"The Self is one with the Universe"

 

and then immediately inserts the wrong self; The Ego.

 

 

The ego is defined by preferences, identified by desires, determined by

boundary.

 

The Self has no preferences, no desires, no lack, no inside, no outside.

It includes all preferences, but is not defined by them. Desire arises

within it, but it is not identified with it.

 

I also have to say: The ego is not the Self.

 

The Secret is selling tools that supposedly fulfill wishes, dreams,

desires. But WHOSE wishes? What LEVEL of desire? What DEPTH of dream?

 

Before you think I am positioning myself as some spiritual

fundamentalist who thinks materialism is bad and "spirituality" is good,

let me set things straight. Me, Stuart Davis? I LOVE money. I LOVE sex.

I want a new house. I'll take a shiny red bike. I want to be rich,

powerful, and successful. And I do not apologize to anyone for that. I

think the ego is good, I think it's games are legitimate and should be

engaged. You know what else? I want YOU to be rich. I want YOU to be

successful, powerful, and have every wish in the circus of your

imagination brought into reality. As long as we're not hurting anyone

else, I say let's go to town. I am the first to stand up and shout "THE

EGO IS NOT EVIL!! THE EGO IS NOT BAD!! IT HAS GOTTEN A RAW DEAL FROM

SPIRITUALITY! LET THE EGO BE WHAT IT ITS!!!" In fact, the ego is quite

literally one of the most astonishing miracles to occur in the history

of Universe. No joke. Celebrate it. It's time we ended the spiritual war

with the ego, include it as another facet of the Beauty in our Being.

Why would we leave anything out? The self counts. The ego matters.

 

I also have to say: The ego is not the Self.

 

The Secret is selling tools that supposedly fulfill wishes, dreams,

desires. But WHOSE wishes? What LEVEL of desire? What DEPTH of dream?

 

Well, here's what sucks about The Secret: There are many levels of self,

but only one which THINKS, and that's the Ego. Thinking, feeling,

thinking, feeling, these two conductors are the hub for all The Secret

espouses, and sadly thoughts and feelings (while important and valid)

come from an extremely shallow dimension of the self. Because of this,

the Secret deeply, sadly, entangles us further into suffering instead of

liberating us from it. The source of suffering is delusion -the illusion

of separateness. It gives rise to craving, longing, desire. It's the

illusion that we lack something that sends us on the Odyssey of

Acquisition.

 

http://stuartdavis.com/node/1138

Kommentarer

Populære indlæg