Course: Psychology 459, Theistic Psychology Fall 2006 Generation 25

Instructor: Dr. Leon James

Introduction to Theistic Psychology: www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/theistic/ch1.htm

Class Homepage: www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/leonj/leonpsy25/classhome-g25.htm

Instructions for this report can be found at: www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/leonj/leonpsy25/459-g25-weekly.htm

My Homepage: http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leon/459f2006/afonin/afonin-home.htm

 

 

Discovering My Relationship with Theistic Psychology

By Christina Afonin

Sections 1.0 through 1.0.1.2.2

 

Section 1.0 to 1.0.1.2.1

Question 1: Describe your educational experience regarding the positive and negative bias in science. Describe your reaction to what this week's readings say about science education.

Answer 1:

See Theistic Psychology Section 1.0.1 http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/theistic/ch1.htm#topic1

My Education

 

My educational experience with positive and negative bias in science until just recently was limited to one, the negative bias. The negative bias provides that nothing outside the physical time and space exists, therefore; God and the afterlife do not exist. Thoughts and feelings are merely chemical and electrical currents and have no substance. The positive bias on the other hand is the belief that God does exist and that there are two worlds in reality. One world, the natural, is the one in which our bodies now subside; it is in physical time and space. The other world is the spiritual where our minds dwell. The spiritual world is outside time and space and is considered the afterlife.

            Until the beginning of this course when this idea was dropped into my lap, I didn’t realize that there was a term to describe the way that science interpreted their belief of purely physical attributes and denial of the existence of God. As a child growing up with a rich culture and strong religious background, I had a little trouble grasping the popular belief of the negative bias. It was then that I realized that I did not have to believe in it, I just had to understand it and apply it to the physical experiences that I would have inside the classroom. This plot of mine worked well and I succeeded in understanding science, and it was on the first day of this class that I was doing what many scientists must be doing. During their work hours they accept science as their only religion but at home they pray to a purely mental and unphysical being, God.

 

Miracle on 34th Street

 

This reminds me of the movie “Miracle on 34th Street” when Chris Cringle is on trial for being a fraud Santa, so there’s the dramatic possibility that Christmas will be ruined for millions of children, well the lawyer opposing Chris Cringle is asked whether or not his children practice the rituals associated with Santa, he says yes they do. The ironic thing about that is the whole time the lawyer is denying any existence of Santa but in the privacy of his own home, he indulges and believes. The thing that won the trial was a dollar bill with the words “In God We Trust” circled on it. The judge then went on to say that many people believe in the existence of God and they have no physical proof, why then should Santa, be denied to these children when the same applies.

 

Theistic Psychology Introduced

 

After being introduced to the positive bias, I feel comfortable with the theory of God’s existence and participation in science. The positive bias does not deny the existence and even applies it to science while the negative bias struggles to lock everything into a physical term and has no tolerance towards things that have no material substance. Personally, the negative bias has no merit if its definition of thoughts and feelings is nothing more than chemicals and electric activity. How can one differentiate their thoughts when they are all the same, just chemicals and electricity? I believe that people have more weight than that of their bodies; there is much weight inside their minds.

Question 2: Describe your reaction to discovering that you are a dual citizen. Is this difficult for you to go along with as part of the positive bias?

Answer 2:

See Theistic Psychology Section 1.0.1.1 http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/theistic/ch1.htm#dualism

Existence in Two Places?

It was intriguing to think of Swedenborg’s studies about being a dual citizen. In the negative bias, which denies the existence of anything that is not made up of matter within physical time and space; thoughts, emotions, and feelings are studied. The theories presented about thoughts, feelings and emotions not being able to logically exist because of physical evidence is a laughable reality. In the current readings that I have dissected, the weight of thoughts and other emotional experiences in the brain has been speculated. How is it that the brain remains a constant weight in proportion to the body while thoughts and feelings continue to expand and grow? And if they are to scientifically exist then true to the negative bias’ standards of everything consisting of matter within physical time and space, aren’t thoughts and feelings supposed to have a weight and consist of a physical substance? However, scientifically, thoughts and feelings are described as simple chemical and electrical currents taking place in the brain. I find this difficult to grasp if thoughts, feelings and emotions are such an important part of who we are. How is it possible for our personality to be constructed of a chemical combination inside our physical bodies? These gaps in the negative bias of scientific understanding of these specific processes in the mind force me to look elsewhere for answers.

What do I think?

Through the positive bias perspective I find the dual citizen theory quite plausible. If being open minded to God’s existence then making thoughts and feelings a spiritual matter that connect our physical bodies to a mental world makes more sense than the negative bias, then so be it. I’d have to say that it makes more sense than believing that thoughts are made up of electrical currents in the brain, that our ideas come from puffs of realization in the currents, and that our representation of ourselves is merely chemicals. In being a dual citizen our physical embodiments are direct representations of our true mental selves.

 Our natural state of being is influenced by our mental mind which in turn is influenced by the divine speech of the divine human, or in other words, the thoughts of God influence us through Him, who is the divine human and the origin of every creation in the mental world as well as the physical world.  The mental world being the one we will reside in after the physical body decays and we are resuscitated into the afterlife. That we are only in the natural or physical world for a time being and that the afterlife does exist and can be scientifically studied through Swedenborg gives me comfort, that it is finally given an objective view for unbiased scientific study.

Speculation

There’s a saying about humans only using 10% of their brain, this is a good example for the natural mind, because the natural mind is only a small part of the make up of an individual’s mind. And we are only conscious of the natural mind even though we are influenced through our spiritual mind

Question 3: Give a description of the anatomy of a human being viewed in the positive bias as a dual citizen. Describe your reaction to this new knowledge.

 

Answer 3:

 

See Theistic Psychology Section 1.0.1.2.1

http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/theistic/ch1.htm#born

What are humans made of?

The human being is made up of several parts. At the top of the hierarchy is the divine human, or God who created and is in everything. From him flows divine speech through the spiritual sun which feeds the spiritual mind which is the highest level of the human mind in the spiritual world. Divine speech otherwise known as God’s thoughts; pass to the spiritual mind along with the spiritual light form the spiritual sun.

The spiritual sun is much like the natural sun. It provides the individual with much needed substances for life and growth. In the case of the spiritual sun, the light which is given the necessity that is given off is truth and good. The spiritual mind remains unconscious until after death and awakens after resuscitation. The spiritual mind is the human heavens, it is the result of your life in the natural world. Just below the spiritual and before the natural mind is the rational mind. This part of the mind controls rationality, motivation, cooperativeness, and love.

Below the rational mind and the one that all living individuals are experiencing now is the natural mind. This is the state that humans are in while alive and remains conscious until resuscitation. The natural mind is responsible for an individual’s personality, subconscious, and memory. The natural mind inherits the human hells that are inherent in our parents, and grandparents, and so on through the ancestors. The human hells are negative personality traits and behaviors that an individual must harness, control and accept before they can reach the highest and purest level of heaven. Through this example I am reminded of Buddhism and heaven becomes a sort of nirvana if you will, with true inner peace.  The natural mind is followed by the physical body or at this point the individual is in the natural world. This is where we live out our natural lives and attempt to dissuade our hellish traits.

So wait.. Our spiritual bodies are connected to our natural? Then, is it like a mirror image of me above myself?

            Applying the positive bias to all the things that I’m learning in this class, I find the diagram very interesting. It’s easy to understand and provides a better explanation than any written paragraph could have. As for the knowledge of the anatomy of a human being, it’s a reasonable breakdown of how the systems apply to each other and the way the orders are set. I think that with this knowledge any other material pertaining to this topic will be much easier for me to comprehend. I’ve always been curious as to how thoughts, emotions and feelings apply to the psychological studies of human beings. Psychology focuses on learning, behavior, memory and how to evoke different emotions, but in the courses that I have taken I haven’t noticed much about the origin or just the explanation of feelings, thoughts and emotions. Scientifically; this has always been a difficult topic for me to expand upon until now. Now I have a rational and logical way to examine these processes of the mind and it will be legitimate because it is a scientific study begun by Swedenborg.  

Reflections…

Looking at the model though reminds me of looking at a mountain by the side of a lake. When the waters are calm you can see the reflection of the mountain in the lake, so to apply this to the human anatomy then we could say that there’s a pool of water that reflects ourselves, and instead it is our mental body looking back at us.

Question 4: Explain the idea that there is only one mental world in the human race. How was it proven by Swedenborg? What are the potential consequences of this discovery for you and society once it becomes known?

Answer 4:

 

See Theistic Psychology Section 1.0.1.2.1

http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/theistic/ch1.htm#born

 

Why waste un-time and un-space?

Why would there be a need for multiple mental worlds? God created a singular world for each the physical and the mental worlds for the human race to reside in. One, the physical is the world in which we prepare for the mental world, and the mental world is the eternal world that everyone will live in when in the afterlife. All humans are born in both worlds, so we have a dual-citizenship. The mental world is the world of cause, and the other, the physical, is the world of effects. So they are in a corresponding relationship and cannot stand alone.

Um, about Swedenborg…

Swedenborg was the only one to experience both of the worlds consciously. At the age of 57 till he was 84 he traveled through the mental world while still conscious of his physical surroundings. He took advantage of this gift that he claimed was from God, treated it as a study and interviewed several people in the mental world; he studied as much as he could so that he could have a thorough understanding of it, and record his experiences clearly. Swedenborg’s studies show that we are all in the mental world right now but we are not conscious; we are conscious in the physical world and will be this way until we die and are resuscitated, then it will be the opposite, we will be conscious in the mental world and not in the physical world. We will become disconnected from our physical bodies and will remain a mental being. Although this mental being is not like a ghost that floats around, we will retain our physical shape because in the physical world our shape was a representation of our mind thus in the mental world we are the same, solid person.                                            

Swedenborg Worship

            This concept of dual citizenship and two worlds is one that I’m still absorbing. It’s extremely interesting and I’m looking forward to learning more about it. It’s a unique way to look at life in general and I can see where Swedenborgism would come from. It reminds me a lot of the Buddhist religion and their concept of nirvana; I think that the heaven and hells of the eternal world are the nirvana that people are searching for, without the reincarnation.                                                                                               

Today’s society will only scoff

            Concerning society and the consequences if they learn about the two worlds, I don’t know how people would interpret the idea. It’s a hard concept to just throw out in normal conversation, and the little that I have mentioned to friends and family was mind-boggling to them. At least at first, after thinking about it they were able to understand the ideas pertaining to the worlds. Such as, thoughts and feelings not being a physical matter you can touch and feel and that it had to be placed into another world because it couldn’t just be simple electrical currents and chemicals. I think it would be rejected at first because it would not be understood. But there are those that have adopted it as a religion and are practicing it so it has been somewhat accepted. In truth, I’m not entirely sure what to assume from society’s knowledge of dual-citizenship, my only fear would be a communistic approach, but again I only assume that because of my Russian background.

Question 5: What does it mean that we are "born into eternity"? How does this relate to God and the afterlife? How does it relate to the anatomy of our mental world?

Answer 5:

See Theistic Psychology Section 1.0.1.2.1

http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/theistic/ch1.htm#born

Describing Born into Eternity

Each and every individual that is born here in the natural world is also born into the mental world. This dual-citizenship not only creates a connection between the two worlds but it also guarantees the individual’s immortality. The idea that we are “born into eternity” is simply that we are immortal. From the time we take our first breath to the continuous eternity we will subconsciously live in until our death, and consciously continue in the afterlife, makes us immortal.

Behave!

Our choices in the natural world will affect where we end up in the spiritual world.          We only spend an insignificant amount of time in the physical world, the natural world, before we find our place in the spiritual world, or the afterlife. So if we spend such a small amount of time in the natural world then why does it even exist? Because humans have inherited their ancestral hellish traits, and they must decide throughout their lives which ones they can live without and which ones they cannot let go.

Only you control your destiny!

So, in the natural world, humans grow into the immortal self that they choose. The natural world is God giving humans the right to free will and to make whatever decisions we want. To a point of course, because through the anatomy of a human, our natural mind is deeply influenced by our spiritual mind which is exposed to only the things that God allows us to see. He whispers little notions into our spiritual minds which then pass it into our natural mind for speculation and then we act upon these whispered notions and ultimately decide: heaven or hell.

            There cannot be a birth straight into the spiritual world without first making an appearance in the natural world. If this were to happen, humans would not appreciate their place in the spiritual world. They would not understand their place and therefore would not be fulfilled by it. The natural world offers individuals the opportunity to decide which part of the spiritual world they feel most comfortable with. There are layers of heaven and layers of hell, and each of these places coincides with the hellish traits, that are inherited, to accommodate each person perfectly.

The afterlife relates to being “born into eternity” because being immortal is the afterlife. They are one and the same, eternity is the afterlife, it is immortality, it is the final destination. Once a natural life is lived out, the person will spend the rest of their days in heaven, or hell. There is no second chance to decide, choose wisely!

Copy-cat

Our mental world is a direct representation of the spiritual world and every component in the spiritual world is present in the mental world. For example, the sun, the natural sun that we experience in the natural world, the one that everything in this world was created from, is a representation of the spiritual sun. Like the natural sun, the spiritual sun, is a combination of everything in the spiritual world. The natural sun shines down light and expends happy feelings from people, it is a necessary part of our lives, as is the spiritual sun. the spiritual sun shines its light down upon the mental world and in the light is good and truth, important compounds for our mental health.  

Question 6: Describe the relationship between the physical body and the mental body. How do they work together? How do you react to learning these facts about yourself?

Answer 6:

See Theistic Psychology Section 1.0.1.2.2 http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/theistic/ch1.htm#conjoint

The Threefold Self

The physical body and the mental body are related because the physical body is a direct representation of the spiritual body. The mental organs which make up the spiritual mind, or the mental body, are the affective, cognitive, and sensorimotor organs. The affective organ makes up the feeling processes in our mind. It controls such things as our needs, our desires, our motivations, endeavors and love. The cognitive organ gives us the thinking process in our mind. The cognitive controls our memory, thoughts, common sense, planning, words, imagination, and knowledge. The sensorimotor organ consists of the ability to sense the environment outside our bodies. It also gives us the ability to control our motor movements in the environment. This means that the sensorimotor organ is the five senses, smell, sight, taste, sound, and sense, and the ability to move our body.  

An eye for an eye

The mental body works with the physical body to maintain a fully capable being. The mental body’s organs are represented as the major systems in the physical body. The affective organ is represented by the circulatory system in the natural body, while the cognitive organ is represented by the respiratory system. The sensorimotor system is represented by the nervous system.

A piece of my mind

Learning that the physical body and the mental body are connected doesn’t shock me because I have studied reflexology a little bit and it connects all the processes in the mind with parts of the body and pressure points. Just like acupuncture or Chinese medicine connect the inner organs with visible parts of the body. The idea that the mental body corresponds with the physical is not a new concept for me to chew on at all.

Touchy subject.. religion

Actually it only adds to the spiritual beliefs that I choose to partake in. They’re not religiously affiliated per se, but they are definitely a mix of all the experiences that I’ve had with religion and culture. I believe that a study of different religions and cultures are important ingredients for open-minded and well-rounded individuals. Being able to gain knowledge in these aspects and not feel that one must believe in them is vital for people to understand, otherwise they fear it. Understanding what Swedenborg is trying to say is not difficult to do because it corresponds nicely with religions and does not contradict their beliefs.

Much of the concepts that have been stated in the readings as well as those discussed in class connect fairly well with a variety of beliefs and cultures. That’s not to say that Swedenborg is just another religion, actually it’s more than religion.

The newest religion: hypocrisy!

Currently I have been forming a negative opinion of culture and religion, as it seems to always be founded on hypocrites and control. I’ve been feeling that it is corrupting the basic belief that it was at first celebrating; God, or a divine being. All that Swedenborg studied and observed about God and the spiritual world is the simplest form of what religions seem to exaggerate. And amazingly enough, it seems that I’ve taken my beliefs and stripped them to their barest form, without religion, and it mirrors Swedenborg’s studies.

Question 7. Explain the relationship between Divine Speech and human minds. You'll need to include the concepts of "Spiritual Sun" and "spiritual substances."

Answer 7:

See Theistic Psychology Section 1.0.1.2.1

http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/theistic/ch1.htm#born

Sugar and Spice, and Everything Divine   

Divine Speech is the aura that connects the human mind with the spiritual sun. The human mind is broken up into three parts, from an order of highest to lowest. The spiritual mind which belongs to the human heavens is the first following God the divine human and Divine Speech, the rational mind follows after the spiritual mind. It is the motivation, cooperativeness, and love, of your mind. Then the last part of the human mind is the natural mind. The natural mind which pertains to memory, intelligence, and personality, also connects to and is apart of the physical world. After resuscitation, the natural mind is no longer conscious as the spiritual mind takes over the afterlife.

A spiritual blend

The spiritual sun is much like the natural sun; it feeds the human mind as the natural sun feeds the physical body. Also both the natural and spiritual suns carry the compounds that are the compilation of the physical and eternal body. The sun is an important part of both of the worlds, in both it is the center of the worlds, and from the suns, the worlds were created. From the natural sun, our bodies were created and from the spiritual sun come the spiritual substances that make up our eternal mind. Spiritual substances are the make up of everything in the mental world, originating from the spiritual sun. The suns offer life nutrients and give us the most important substance, sunlight. The nourishment provided by the natural sun is light and the nourishment form the spiritual sun is divine speech. It is truth and good that shines down on the mental body and feeds it.

This truth and good, Divine Speech, then travels down through the human minds from the spiritual mind through the rational mind and down through the natural mind, where it becomes apart of the Sacred Scripture. The problem with the Sacred Scripture in the physical world is that it isn’t exact in the physical world because the languages that are used are natural physical languages that cannot fully describe Divine Speech the way it is described in the mental world. Divine Speech is the only tongue of the mental world, it is the united language that everyone speaks because everyone in the mental world is no longer divided they are all one type of people living and enjoying their immortal lives in which ever way they chose to, in heaven or hell. The people there no longer have a connection to their physical identities; although they can access their memories if they so choose. People there no longer belong to a certain ethnic group, or live in a specific country. They no longer have a family, their immortality is their own. Their punishment or rewards are what they lived in the physical world to gain.

Divine speech is all that God is thinking and that which he allows humans to be aware of. This is the human capability to study and understand science, or any other subject for that matter. But mainly it is the ability to apply god and science together.

Question 8: Explain the answer to "Where are you?" as viewed from the perspective of "substantive dualism."

Answer 8:

 See Theistic Psychology Section 1.0.1.1 http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/theistic/ch1.htm#dualism

“Where are you?”

Where are you? It’s a simple and easy question, one that I hear at least four times a day. But if taken from the substantive dualism perspective, then the answer would not necessarily be my physical location. Where are you? Well, I’m here and there. I’m in the spiritual world. I’m in one mental mind subconscious and awaiting the death of my natural body so that I may free myself. I am in the physical world making choices that will determine my place in the afterlife. I am living as complete a life as I can so that I may be able to banish the negative traits that were passed down to me from my parents. I am determining what is important in my life in the physical world so that I may have a fulfilled life in heaven after my resuscitation. So that I may choose the area that I want to live out the rest of my life. I am in my room writing a report. I am in the spiritual world avoiding bad people and breathing in the essence of good and truth from the spiritual sun.

Where are we?

“Where is everyone?” everyone, like me, is in the same state that I am in. They are in the mental world and they are in the physical world. In the mental world they are waiting for themselves, and influencing themselves slightly. In the physical world they are living a life in which they will establish what type of person they want to be and what their priorities are. They are deciding which traits, positive and negative they can and cannot banish from their lives.

X-men

So are we in two places at once? No, we are in only one place. It’s almost as if we’re in one dimension and at the same time we are in another. My best representation of it would be a scene from the movie, X-men. The scene takes place in a huge dome shaped contraption where Xavier is suspended in the middle over a bridge. Xavier has psychic abilities, but only to a certain extent, and this contraption helps him locate other mutant human beings with a heightened state of his special powers.

So in this contraption, Xavier sits with a helmet over his head to expand his powers and harness them. Once this takes place he is able to see the many mutant people in this orb as they go about their natural lives. This example reminds me of the spiritual world and the natural world. In the natural world, people are going about their lives unaware of the spiritual world, which is like the orb which is depicting everyone, and yet it is its own world that we are unable to access yet.

In other words, Xavier in X-men is like Swedenborg in the spiritual world. He knows of the existence of the spiritual world, and he is able to access both, just like Xavier. One day we will leave the natural world and become a part of this spiritual world, but for now we are here.

Conclusion..

Where are you? I am here. I exist in the mental world.

 

Question 9: How would you prove that you are immortal? Think about it by reflecting on the new concepts in this week's readings. Make a list. Be sure you can define them to your own rational comprehension. Now present the proof to a friend or two. Describe their reactions and arguments. Were you surprised as to what happened?

Answer 9:

See Theistic Psychology Section 1.0.1.1 http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/theistic/ch1.htm#dualism

My never ending life

            The only thing I would need to say to prove that I am immortal would be to say that I was “born into eternity”. Being born into eternity applies the dual-citizenship model that I previously discussed. It stated that an individual was born not only into the natural world but also into the mental world. This is where, once the individual passes on will become the eternal world or heaven that they will spend the rest of their immortal life in.

            But if the argument needed more proof than I would have to ask someone how much of their life and decisions were ruled by emotions and logical thought processes. I would ask them how often they thought. To this question the only response could be “all the time”, now I’d have to ask this someone if they truly believed that what dominated most of their time, the thoughts that dominated their every being were simply limited to the natural life that they were experiencing now. What happens to these thoughts, feelings, and emotions once you die? Do they just disappear into oblivion? This can’t be! Your thoughts intricate and amazing cannot just go away one day, what would be the point of that? Why are we given such an remarkable gift if our only experience with it will be in this life, what about all these provoking thoughts that we have they must have a resolution or more substance than our physical body allows!

How much does YOUR brain weigh?

            How can so many thoughts be put into our tiny little brains, and stored there along with our emotions, the process that allows a reaction to all the senses, feelings and memories. Our mind does not have the capacity to hold all of these in one place. We must exist outside our physical bodies in order to exist completely!

Hey, listen to this…

            When I described this to my friend they were in complete agreement that we have to have an existing self outside our bodies. We have to have a soul, so to speak, to maintain all that we do in the physical self and then be able to refer back to it, along with all the other processes our mind is responsible for. We have to have some sort of storage, and to believe that our brain is storage enough is limiting ourselves.

Dane Cook, the comedian

            In response to atheists, I just recently watched a comedy act by Dane Cook. He is a comedian that questions a lot of obvious aspects of life. One of his topics was atheists. He had an encounter with an atheist who laughed at Cook’s beliefs concerning afterlife. When Cook asked the atheist, he responded that of course he did not believe in the afterlife and that he believed that once he died he would become a part of the earth and would come back in the form of a tree. How is incarnating into a tree a more plausible idea than the belief of an afterlife? How is the belief in having a soul more ridiculous than becoming a part of the earth and resurrecting, so to speak, as a tree? Cook then went on to finish his comedy skit, he said, “Well, you know what; I do hope that he becomes part of the earth and that he then grows into a tree. And you know what? I hope that one day a logger comes into this forest, where this atheist has grown into a tree, and I hope this logger chops the atheist tree down and grinds him into tiny pieces so that he can be made into paper.” After a brief pause he continued, “And I hope they print the bible on him!” Well, wouldn’t that just take the cake for irony.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Section 1.0.1.2.2

Question 1: Describe the mental physiology of men and women. How do you relate to this anatomical difference? Will it make a difference to your life in any way? It leads to different spiritual responsibilities in the marriage relationship. It might be helpful to read Volume 11 Section 11.4.10.1 "The Wife is a Form of the Highest Human Wisdom" at:
www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/theistic/ch11.htm#wife-highest-wisdom

Answer 1:

See Theistic Psychology Section 1.0.1.2.2 http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/theistic/ch1.htm#conjoint

Men vs Women the ultimate battle

The mental physiology of men and women is somewhat different in that their cognitive and affective organs are placed differently in their bodies. The affective organ in a man’s mind is located more inwardly than the cognitive organ and the opposite is true for a woman, their cognitive organ has been place more inwardly than their affective organ.

The pants and the skirt

            This mental difference in the physiology of the two genders is represented in the differences of the reproductive systems in the physical physiology of men and women. This small difference in the physical body results in a direct representation of the mental and thus creates a huge difference in the way that men and women react to and are influenced by the world.

            Under this concept, women are prone to feeling emotions and then basing their thoughts on these emotions, where men first think and continue by then basing their emotions or feelings on their thoughts.

Gender Psychology

After being introduced to these concepts I am more aware of the differences that were present in men and women. There is no question that men and women are different and it has always been a major topic of studies. It is constantly speculated in relationships over the radio or in books, as well as in psychology classes and in normal conversations between friends.

I don’t believe that it will make much of a difference because it has already presented itself in the past and I am fully aware of it. Although the concepts behind the differences are more palpable in theistic psychology than they were in anything else I have studied.

Tomboy Nature?

I find it difficult to accept that there is such a distinguishable difference, because I find that I relate to men more than I do to women. I don’t know if this idea is common among women, but personally I don’t think that I act fully on my emotions, more than I do rational thought. I feel that there is a balance among the two and I don’t let emotions control my life.

Physically yes, I am a woman and mentally I must represent that, I know that I am not a man mentally. But if I am to conjoin myself with the definition of women, I have to separate myself from certain types of women. I have to wonder where some women get the gall to do or say some of the things that they do. And if I have interpreted marriage right in the theistic psychology sense then am I to believe that women have the right to act in this way and that men have to accept it? If I were a man, with the mind I have now, I don’t think I’d be up for the challenge, and it is a challenge because some women are just plain psychotic! 

I don’t suppose that with my mentality that I will look for a man who is more comfortable with basing his thoughts on emotions. I think that through experience I find it more beneficial to base my emotions on my thoughts first.

Perhaps when focusing on a relationship, my mind will retain its womanly physiology and I will act thus, perhaps my challenge in life will be to assimilate to the female mental physiology in order to form a completely unified marriage.

Question 2: Describe the physiology involved in the two stages of marriage. Consult Volume 11, Section 11.4.5 "Conjunction Dynamics in Marriage" at:
www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/theistic/ch11.htm#conjunction-dynamics
Write out your own explanations and draw your own diagrams. When you are ready, explain it to one or two friends. What difficulty did you run into? What is your conclusion?

Answer 2:

See Theistic Psychology Section 1.0.1.2.2 http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/theistic/ch1.htm#conjoint and Volume 11 Section 11.4.5 www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/theistic/ch11.htm#conjunction-dynamics   

Man and Wife? Yin and Yang?

The two stages of marriage consist of the conjunction of the affective and the cognitive organs. These two organs are reversed in men and women when they are born and upon conjoining their opposite organs align to create a perfect union. The man is born with his cognitive organ surrounding his affective organ. He thinks rather than feels, as opposed to a woman who is born with her affective organ surrounding her cognitive organ. She feels first and then thinks. An other description of this could be that a man’s good and love is surrounded, or even protected, by his truth and wisdom where a woman is the opposite of that, her truth and wisdom is surrounded by her good and love.

Hey, check this out

            When I approached my friend and roommate, Anastasia, about this model the most difficult thing I ran across was telling her to view it in the positive bias perspective. I first had to explain to her what that meant and explain the class to her a little more outside focusing on the marriage stages. But once we got down to the real business at hand she was open towards the diagram that I drew and the explanation that I gave her. Not being an expert on the topic I may have confused her the first time I tried to explain it, but once she thought about what I had explained to her, and after she studied the diagram she agreed with the idea of the conjunction and the opposite make up of men and women. The theory that opposites attract concerning the mental organs is also a valid theory, after all men and women think quite differently from each other.

 After pondering what I had just explained to her she took it to the next level and asked me about different circumstances such as homosexual relationships and how they would fit into the model. Or why people had to create a unified marriage in the first place, she asked, “can people still make it to heaven without their soul mate?” to these questions I responded that I didn’t really know the answer, specifically for the homosexual predicament. But as for the soul mate question, I could only say that if to get into heaven all you need is a mate and if all of your hellish traits have been pushed aside and they no longer matter to you then wouldn’t it make sense for God to provide you with that one thing that you need?

What I think she meant

I think that overall, Anastasia got a good grasp on the idea by applying the positive bias, and accepting that all she had to do was understand it, not believe it. I think that the idea of understanding versus believing is a concept that everyone is currently struggling with. Although I’m sure that she doesn’t fully agree with it and it isn’t really going to affect her motivations it provided us with an interesting topic for discussion, and I’m sure that I will share more of the things that I learn from this course with her.        

 

Question 3: Explain why the mental body of men and women have to be reciprocals of each other in order to achieve conjugial unity. How do you assimilate this piece of knowledge in the positive bias mode?

Answer 3:

See Theistic Psychology Section 1.0.1.2.2 http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/theistic/ch1.htm#conjoint

Can you mix fire and water?

Men and women act differently from one another, they are physiologically different mentally and physically and must be so to be able to conjoin. Men and women physically are different in order to achieve reciprocity. Reciprocity is a goal in which men and women will achieve external and internal good and truth through each other.

They can only do this through each other though because of their physiological mental make up. The cognitive organ in men is more outward than their affective organ; women on the other hand are the opposite. Their cognitive is more inward than their affective. When a man and a woman conjoin, their cognitive and affective organs whether external or internal will conjoin because they are opposite each other. The man’s external cognitive organ will conjoin with the woman’s external affective organ and the man’s internal affective organ will conjoin with the woman’s internal cognitive organ. Man’s external truth and woman’s external good conjoin as do the man’s internal good with the woman’s internal truth. With this conjunction both men and women can receive good and truth internally and externally. Thus through conjunction, man and woman make a fully reciprocal and complete being.

Where do babies come from?  

Just as physically when a men and women conjoin, they are receiving each other. I don’t have to explain the birds and the bees but you get the idea! A man needs a woman just as a woman needs a man for this act in order to create another human being to continue this same lifestyle that they are living.

Jigsaw Puzzle Time!

Conjunction is like puzzle pieces. You can’t just force two pieces together in hopes that they will create the desired image. You have to pick and choose carefully and try them out to see if they will fit together. This makes the long process strenuous and time consuming but the result is always a beautiful image and one that you appreciate more because you were the one to create it.

Through the positive bias mode we can see that one individual’s goal should be to find another who they can achieve a perfect unity with and become complete and full through the conjunctive sense. A woman needs a man to receive external truth and internal good as a man needs a woman to receive external good and internal truth. Woman and men are halves that need each other to function well spiritually.

Oh to be whole!

Men and woman cannot fulfill themselves alone, and much of their natural lives are spent realizing this concept, and even through out it each individual is constantly in search of the perfect mate to conjoin with. So it becomes an inherited belief that we must find a mate to spend the rest of our lives with, the rest of our eternal lives that is.

My question pertaining to the soul mate is. Is there only one person that any individual can conjoin with, or is a conjugial marriage a possibility with anyone who can achieve a reciprocal relationship? Or is this idea just another romantic theory that was conjured up by mankind because of their fear of being left alone and without anyone?

Question 5: Do a google search on marriage. What impressions do you get from this? Summarize the trends and ideas that seem to dominate this topic. How would theistic psychology fit into this?

Answer 5:

See Theistic Psychology Section 1.0.1.2.2 http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/theistic/ch1.htm#conjoint

Computer Counselor

After performing a search, the results that showed up pertained to marriage help and instructions for how to reach and maintain successful marriages. On the right side of the search page was a panel with results for the search as well, there was a link to a marriage and divorce record, as well as effective marriage counseling.

My impression of the search results is that the most prevalent searches about marriages are always concerning marriage crisis and problems. It seems that people cannot understand why their marriages are failing and they are making a valiant attempt to understand this by searching for answers online.

Does the computer really know?

What can online research tell you about your marriage though? It’s not all the same; all marriages are different because of the people involved. I don’t think that someone will find a quick fix to their marriage online. It’s something that has to be worked out personally. My question is, if you aren’t happy in your relationship why are you going to force yourself to better it or to make it bearable. Why not get that divorce and go out and find a person who is better suited to your needs and you can be happy with?

Is it that difficult to find someone that you can create a relationship with? I don’t think so, people interact daily with each other, so why can’t a relationship be started in just the same way?

All signs point to STAY

The trends and topics of marriage seem to be failed marriages and how to save marriages. Or divorce rates, and how bad divorce is. Since when is leaving someone who isn’t your soul mate to search for the real one bad? Unless there are certain responsibilities with that person, such as children, why would someone stay in a badly connected relationship?

And just as I had asked I think that theistic psychology would ask as well. If you cannot conjoin with a person in the way that you want, why not go look somewhere else? Our goal in life is to find a soul mate, one that is suitable for our needs and one that will compliment our life. Why then must people struggle with their failing attempts at conjunction with someone who is unwilling?

I don’t get it…

Their unwillingness is their hellish trait, why is it imperative to stay with them if the only thing you are succeeding in doing is picking up their hellish trait and making it your own? By staying with them and struggling with something that is resisting you are ruining your chance of happiness. And isn’t happiness the eternal goal?

I don’t know if the emotional attachment is too much to just let go, but if the person you are with is not beneficial to your emotional state then why willingly give yourself wholeheartedly to them?

Am I missing something?

I’ve encountered many people in bad relationships, and I’ve always asked them, “if you’re not happy, why don’ you just leave?” and the only response that I get all the time is, “it’s not that easy”. Explain to me what isn’t easy about letting someone, who is so obviously not your best friend, go? Why go through the pain and suffering when you will not be getting anything in return?

I guess that because of the way I was raised, I am unwilling to take anyone’s bullshit. I don’t feel that giving my life to something that harnesses me and hinders my personal happiness is beneficial to me. I feel that once I meet someone who is willing to do anything for my happiness, and I feel the same way then it will be alright to struggle in the ways that I need to struggle in order to fully conjoin with that person. But until then, I will not entangle myself in relationships doomed to fail.

Question 6: Discuss the mental physiology of men and women with a friend or two. What difficulties do you encounter when explaining this to them? What is your conclusion?

Answer 6:

See Theistic Psychology Section 1.0.1.2.2 http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/theistic/ch1.htm#conjoint

Friend One..

The hardest part about explaining the physiology of men and women with my friend was that I felt as if I was a religious extremist who came to her door and was trying to sell her salvation. I felt as if she was looking at me as if I was crazy and that what I was saying was just a load of crap.

Once I had finished my speech, she looked at me thoughtfully, nodded her head and said, “yeah, that makes sense”. I was shocked to say the least. But then she went on to say that, it’s obvious that men and women are hardwired differently and that this explanation is not too far from the beliefs of the general population. She is the type of person that takes everything at face value and doesn’t overreact irrationally over anything, so I think that describing this situation to her was not as difficult as it would be to explain it to a stubborn strong-willed person. Such as my other friend.

Friend Two..

When I explained the concept to her, she had plenty of questions for me. Most of  her questions pertained to theistic psychology rather than the topic at hand. And after attempting to argue them with her, I just simply stated that I did not know enough of the topic to be able to answer some of her questions, although I did put in the effort and made her think a little. She stuck to her questions and I had to sacrifice this topic to keep our relationship. I don’t think I’ll come to her with any more concepts concerning theistic psychology. We’ll keep it simple

But the thing that surprised me the most is that I already knew this! Why did I feel as though theistic psychology was so off-base from what my friends believe. Sure there are some extreme ideas but it’s not as if it’s completely unhinged. And I have had plenty of conversations about the differences between men and women, so why is this any different? Because there’s an actual study that confirms these ideas? Is it that there’s a real explanation rather than ranting from both men and women about how we are different?

And of course the obvious statement…

Men are from Mars, and women are from Venus. This has always been a part of my life and the lives of everyone around me. Men and women around me have always discussed their confusion because of these differences, even when I was small I was approached by both men and women with the same question, “why? Why do they do that?”

Friend Three…

Actually, recently a friend in this same class and I have been prone to discuss the insane differences between men and women. Of course, we don’t come out and say this, all we do is relate occurrences and consider the sometimes awkward differences, always asking each other, “why do they [men or women] do that?” or “what is their motivation? Can you relate to this person for doing what they did?” 

Men and women are so different from each other mentally that even their linguistic capabilities are studied. It’s as if we need a Rosetta stone to interpret what women are trying to communicate to men and vice versa.

So, if we have so many differences, then why are we so persistent to create a relationship with each other? Why do our differences combine to create a perfectly unified soul?

Question 7: Read at least five of the student reports on marriage listed at:
        www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/leonj/leonpsy25/409b-g25-lecture-notes.htm#readings
and discuss your overall impression of them.

Answer 7:

Generation 24 Who did I pick?

See Skip Saito’s 2nd Report:                             http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leon/409bs2006/saito/saito-409b-g24-report2.htm

and

See Bao Mien Lau’s 2nd Report:

http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leon/409bs2006/lau/lau-409b-g24-report2.htm

 

My impression of Skip Saito’s report:

I read Skip Saito’s report, “My understanding of the unity model of marriage” it seems that he thought about and applied the things he learned in his report to his relationship with his current girlfriend. The evidence stated to support his ideas were clear and I enjoyed reading his report because it applied the theories to his real relationship. The report made understanding the unity model easier because it used realistic experiences with real people.  It also displayed enough of his personality that it wasn’t one of those boring clear cut reports that so many professors ask for.

Saito seems to thoroughly understand the material that he is covering and offers really thorough, thoughtful examples of his own experience with his girlfriend. He has plenty of diagrams that make it easier to understand by looking at it than having to read it.

Oh, by the way…

Overall, I enjoyed reading his report because I had another class with Saito before and had been acquainted with him. It was interesting to see what his thoughts were on such an interesting topic as this. I think that Saito really did put a lot of thought into it and made the best of his time, there seems to be a lot of effort on his part and I only hope that his relationship with his girlfriend improves because of the things he’s learned by taking the course.

And now to critique Bao Mien Lau:

            Much like Saito’s report, Lau’s report addresses the questions asked thoroughly and his scenarios are simple and easy to understand. They offer a lot of their own voice in analyzing rather than making it a fact based analysis, and this makes the report so much easier to read through.

            Because I’m taking the unity model of marriage course as well, I have touched base on some of the things that the previous generations are mentioning in their reports. I think that Lau’s opinions about Dr. Laura mimic my own, and I’m satisfied to know that describing explicitly how one feels about Dr. Laura is not controlled. Personally, I can’t wait to explain my thoughts concerning Dr. Laura in a report.

            I was impressed by the dialogues that Lau had created because they exemplified the three models of marriage perfectly. Each was precisely written with no excess filler and analyzed by Lau comprehensively. It showed me that Lau not only understood the material, but was able to apply it as well. 

The afterthought…

I enjoyed reading his advice for future generations, its amusing because the problems that he addresses are problems that we always run into. We all procrastinate at one time or another and this is definitely not the class to be doing that. Another problem that he discussed was absorbing the information with a positive bias. He mentioned that it’s important to learn the material rather than believe it, just as Dr. James had stressed to us and I’m sure all previous generations. But as I’m sure every semester starts, this is a difficult concept to accept and get passed before we can continue and learn from what the course has to offer.