Mr. Pappas
Travis Wall 1/21/02
Part I
A) 1. “Sane people are not well-adjusted”. The ‘normal’ definition of well-adjusted is to believe that adjustment to a society in the sense of complete conformity with the goals internal and external of that society is the goal of mental health.
A) 2. The sane person differs from the normal definition in which his relation to the society around him may be described somewhat as follows: he is in and of society of which he is a member, but he is not a prisoner of that society.
B) 1. He reacts to people who are not ‘sane’ by being as passive as possible, but the fact that this ‘conventionality is a cloak which rests very lightly on his shoulders and if easily cast aside can be seen from the fact that the self-actualizing person practically never allows convention to hamper him or inhibit him from doing anything that he considers very important and basic.’
B) 2. How she approaches the symbolic effect of living is by when we are hungry of course we must eat, but we often at more expensive restaurants than we can afford because we hope to symbolize by this choice of restaurant our high social status. We want to avoid the distasteful low-status symbolism of the modest restaurant where the food is better and the prices are lower.
C) 1. He differs in applying what doesn’t fit his self-concept, to what he observes about himself by knowing the ‘map is not the territory, symbol is not that which is symbolized’. The semantically well-oriented person is primarily concerned with the territory and not with the map, with the social reality rather that the social façade.
C) 2. This makes him more open and honest by letting his attractions and dislikes accessible to awareness.
C) 3. This makes her more aware of the world by knowing her own feelings, and often acting upon them.
C) 4. This makes her unafraid of the unknown by being open to her own experience without being distorted by defense mechanisms.
C) 5. This makes him less rigid and less prejudiced by having no barriers inside himself, and no inhibition which would prevent him fully experiencing of his own emotions.
C) 6. This lets her accept the world as it comes by when the objective situation calls for it, comfortably disorderly, anarchic, vague, doubtful, uncertain, indefinite, approximate, inexact, and inaccurate.
D) 1. This makes her different from other people in that she is a creative individual.
E) 1. He is creative because his personality is fully functioning. This creativity shows itself by the individual being able to compromise.
E) 2. Her creativity shows in her reaction to the world around her by being open to the uniqueness of an object or event.
F) 1. His ethics differ from the morals of society albeit: the fully functioning personality is ethical in the deepest sense. Sane people have a sense of right and wrong that is quite clear cut but that they form their evaluations from deeper levels, rather than normal superficial levels.
Part II
1. Do a great deal of listening and questioning. I think the course tried to accomplish this with the “rule of allness” – in a general statement all is implied. A student who has internalized the discipline of general semantics would be likely to remember the rule right off and know to go into more detail, by listening and questioning the statement.
2. One would want more facts before making decisions, so one doesn’t assume things. When people make assumptions, they don’t see what the person really means.
3. Weigh rather than dismiss any new or original ideas.
4. Keep looking for means of agreement.
5. Because the fully functioning personality likes to know all the things perceived as facts because before before drawing a conclusion.
6. Be a better observer - use the eyes and ears more. Watch for body language, and really listen. Strive to make the other person very clear.
Part III
I will start by saying I’m not really sure how long this paper or the nature of it is supposed to go. Do I understand anything you taught me? I don’t know. Did I do either of the other papers right? I don’t know.
To begin, the judgement of myself against the ideals in SSP, and the profile, are this. I am not sane nor am I fully functioning. In came in ‘unsane’ and left ‘unsane’. The reading in this course hasn’t changed me.
Don’t get me wrong Mr. Pappas, I listened and observed. I questioned and weighted the facts, and asked for more. I know and cooperated, and participated a lot in discussion. I was specifically dissatisfied testing, and tested alert, used body language, was aware and got upset. Maybe I have proved to be a little more sane in the fact that I’m not going to lie to you. I’m not going to bull you about how the ‘reading’ changed me. I’m not being negative here Mr. Pappas, but the fact remains that the only time the book, (which I read last night January 14th), changed my thinking was for 45 minutes a day, five days a week from 9:35 until 10:13. I am sorry but everyday life is too much to think about the book, (it has good pictures though), here is my evidence. I assume things on a very regular basis. My house is green and Michael Gerard is psychotic. The things I will tell you are true, which to me is more important than the grade. Telling the truth is more important to me than the grading system. I’ll leave you with this question. What is the grading system, and what does is truly mean?
<<< back
No comments:
Post a Comment