I know what you mean when you said that Kelly has such a positive, inspiring energy. I was so influenced by it while I was having breakfast at a Food Centre here in Singapore, that I went up to acknowledge a teenager school girl who cleared my table and got that it was part of a volunteer project to experience and understand this work. I thought it was a brilliant project to raise awareness / consciousness of youth who are so very pampered in modern Singapore. I also saw an old acquaintance from Junior College, and perhaps on a regular day I wouldn’t have, but in the space of the interview you did, I went up to him to say hi, reintroduce and get reacquainted. and it went well!

I have a 5 month old, and I’m really interested in how can I influence her to have good dreams, and in fact, one of the things I got from the interview is that perhaps I could encourage her to look forward to fulfilling sleeps and meaningful dreams. This would be a profound shift of how the average kid views sleep (I remember I used to think that sleep was a waste of time for much of my growing years).

Thank you for the gift of your words, inspiring voice, and insights. You treat each guest with such warmth and compassion, giving them a safe and vibrant space, and it is no wonder they grace us with interviews that are truly incredible. Your son Matthew was the one who initially introduced me to your work, and Shrink Rap Radio, and I am now, happily hooked. The moment I saw the title of this particular interview, I was so excited to listen to it, for a variety of reasons. I’m a writer, actress and singer, and double majored in Theater and Women’s Studies in Skidmore College. My thesis dealt largely with beauty mythology and female archetypes, as traced through Greek tragedy, pop culture, media and literature. My work at this very moment explores those topics, in particular, beauty myths and archetypes as seen in the contemporary woman’s condition, or, myth-cycle. Our modern day fairytale. You can imagine: I was already smiling *this* big, waiting for the podcast to load.

A few points in particular resonated with me quite deeply. As noted earlier, understanding beauty and the female condition is a large part of my path in life. As with any power, beauty carries with it great shadow and light, especially in our present climate. I really appreciated and empathized with your point about how as a world culture and family, we are in a toxic place (forgive me for paraphrasing). I agree. I think we are living in such a dark time. I feel a deep-rooted need and responsibility to raise the necessary questions, to invoke honest conversation and action that somehow addresses this toxicity. As a daughter, a sister, and a hopeful future parent, it’s all I can think about, and I work from that impetus. Also, I’m not from the United States, and have my own understanding of beauty, gender roles, etc., collected from different cultures. I was born in Bangladesh, lived in Hawaii until I was 6, then in Thailand until I was 18, and moved to the U.S. for school and work. The women in my immediate family, and the spiritual sisters and mothers I have been blessed to meet through my meanderings, we have our own mythology and history with beauty, the female body currency, and the traditional roles men and women play. Our archetypes are the same though, of course, and that’s why it’s all so fascinating: while the details manifest in different ways, we still embody many of the same shadows and light. Furthermore, in my day to day, as a 28-year old singer and actress, I find myself thoroughly embedded in the dark murky mix that is pop-culture, and it creates an interesting balancing act with my personal politics and creative journey. Trying to write songs that appeal to a large audience, while at the same time, don’t reinforce harmful, antiquated messages about men and women, and actually move and challenge the listener, is a humbling, exciting process. It’s a dialogue that I love and invite. And so, I thank you, because through your calling and gift, you too move this conversation along. You bring and give so much to your audience, and we are grateful.

Something else that really struck me was Dr. Landau’s use of the term “creature”, when referring to “those women.” The term, for me, was one that subtly vilified the women she was talking about, and cast them in the “other” light. In general, I grow a little uncomfortable when hearing or reading that sort of phrasing, as I am of the school that thinks we enter dangerous territory when such words are used. Of course, perhaps it was simply too subtle to be of note, and perhaps I am reading way too much into this. It was interesting to me nevertheless, adding richness to my listening experience, and so, I absolutely welcomed the feeling of trepidation. It reminded me of the time when Naomi Woolf, in her book The Beauty Myth, infamously called fashion models “freaks” and “genetic aliens”, and Cindy Crawford was quoted saying something along the lines that while the book was truly fascinating, being coined a “freak” wasn’t really necessary. “Those creatures” raised my eyebrow for a few reasons: 1) in juxtaposition with Dr. Landau’s comments about her own journey with age, transitioning with grace from one generation to another, feeling and understanding her own reactions to her daughter and other younger women, and 2) I feel that especially as a woman studying the dynamics of women, men, behavior, etc, we tiptoe potentially harmful terrain when coining terms about “those girls/women”. It’s simply a personal belief, and something I try to be mindful of, about breeding words that could hurt ourselves and our sisters, depreciating our work and collective cause in the long run. After a few minutes of mulling this over, I just had to put it aside, saying to myself “It’s a soft ‘they’, not a hard ‘they’, let it go!” (It reminded me of a moment I had a few days ago, when I was trying to explain to a 6 year old how the letter “j” can be used differently in various languages: “Well, in English, we have a hard ‘j’, like ‘jungle’, or ‘jam,’ and then in French we have a soft ‘j’, like ‘jolie’ and ‘jamais’, and of course there’s Carl ‘Jung’, who was Swiss, though the name is German . . you know what sweetheart, we’ll cross that bridge when we get there. Let’s go practice our cartwheels.”) Sometimes, going in circles and arriving at Jung simply signals that it’s time to go practice our cartwheels

Thank you so much once again for this particular podcast, and your podcasts at large. I eagerly look forward to each one, and the exciting, inspiring journey they invariably take us on. I learn so much, every time.

With Warmth,

Reema

Daughter, Sister, Friend, Writer, Actress, Singer, Freak-a-zoid Alien Creature.

p.s.. Thank you David, for encouraging me to embed and share the following video. This is a satire performance-piece called “I Made A Sex Tape”, which looks at sex, voyeurism, celebrity, toxicity . . all that jazz. Enjoy

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A4nLd9QjJUI

It kind of amused me this time that both you guys have the most steorotypical “shrink voices” imaginable. They’re so rich, emotional and thoughtful.

And it was pretty funny at the beginning when you were reading out Dr Naimans qualifications, it took approximately 10 minutes, he’s a really successful guy.

Thanks for the podcast!

The only problem I had was that the podcast seemed to cut off before the end of the interview… did anyone else have that happen?

John makes a good suggestion. Here is the link for joining the discussion:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/shrinkrapradio/join

Perhaps you’d like to join our SRR discussion group and we can all talk about it in detail? (There seems to be a hunger for such a topic).

I specially liked the statement of Dr. Landau about integrating or looking inside oneself for that what one is desiring or that type of person one wants to be or wants to be with.
This is one of the essential findings to me. It is also one that shows the way from being unhappy with oneself towards being happy with oneself.
But I must say, I still have not completely grasped the concept of the shadow although I have read quite a bit about it.
Dr Dave, would you mind explaining this a bit, if you think it would also be interesting to other listeners? That would be very nice.

Very interesting how the archetypes play out so differently in different cultures… The association of blond and gold.. is an interesting lead…

Thank you for one more great interview. I would like to ask every listener, if I may, who earns decent income, to support this site, You also pay for magazines and newspapers and books. Here is one great source on information that we all want to keep having access to. You might not be aware of the fact that a website when it receives a lot of traffic, will have to pay more to a provider. And as long as we prefer to not have too much or not even any ads and commercials on the site, we have to support it.

Dr. Dave

I suffer badly from chronic fatigue, and was fascinated by what I heard Rubin say, but I certainly want to hear more! If Rubin comes back as a guest, if there’s any chance of hearing more about dreaming, sleep, hyper-awareness and fatigue, then I’d be very grateful.

I was so delighted to hear Rubin use the Copernicus analogy regarding consciousness and the unconscious, which is one I use all of the time. I’m much like Freud and Jung in that the term ‘subconscious’ greatly annoys me because of the sheer inaccuracy of the term and the misconceptions it creates. And I think this word in particular is doing a lot to shape people’s thoughts that the psyche in general is consciousness centric, and much like pre-Copernicus with the Earth being at the centre of the universe, the general public have been misled into thinking that you have this all-important consciousness with a smaller, fairly unimportant ‘subconscious’ tacked on the back somewhere. When I introduce them to the idea that consciousness is relatively small and is something that grows out of a much larger *unconscious*, they are often very surprised, and tell me that they’ve always had an idea of the psyche in reverse .

Anyway, enough self-indulgence from moi! Great episode, I’m trawling through Dr. Naiman’s website right now!
John

I wish I could share it instantly on facebook but it seems there is no share button. Maybe I just don`t see it.

I do wish these scientists were a bit more educated about philosophy – so that they would be a lot more cautious about causation – saying that brain states \’cause\’ our experience or tell us \’why\’ something happens.

A crucial point or notion that concerns many people, basically everybody who sees a doctor and gets a diagnosis, is what medical professionals say and the beliefs this is based on. I was stunned by the research result presented by Dr. Aspinwall that people in a bad mood and whatever this may include, get subsequently less help.

Also, the role of beliefs and belief systems that our thinking collectively and individually is based upon, was discussed in a very enlightening way. I think that must be an interesting field for research or maybe it already is?

On a more personal note, I was very sorry to hear about the illness of your son. I hope things are going well for him and the family. Glad to hear that he found what sounded like his vocation!

Outstanding interview with an outstanding guest! Thank you very much,

Lisa

The exploration of why it is so important for art therapists to be immersed in their own art process really resonated with me as well. I’m definitely going to share this interview with others! Thank you

I’ve forwarded your questions about the Kerr book to Dr. Beebe. I’m hoping he may respond here. I think you make a good point in your last paragraph above about differences in sexual attitudes between then and now.

Since everyone feels compelled to comment on the literal accuracy of the sexuality in the film, I thought I might offer at least one comment on this. We are, after all, talking about events that happened 100 years ago. Sexuality, as such, was not then what it is to us today. I suspect holding hands and kissing may have been even more scandalous then than bondage and discipline is to us today…at least in a therapeutic relationship.

Again, thank you both for this very interesting discussion!

Dave, good show. more on jung and the neurosciences, please.

I hope they catch up to gestalt one day – that the unit of analysis is the ‘organism-environment field’ (I’d prefer to say “the person in their situation”).

Mr Coyne did mention that his focus was on cancer and that it didn’t apply to heart attacks where people can do stuff to influence outcome.

Research can only deal with generalities but the clinician is concerned with individuals. The research is concerned with the ‘objective’ (eg length of life) but the clinician with the ‘subjective’ (helping the client feel good).

The researcher’s perspective dealing with generalities ignores the outliers. Eg in fitness those who don’t recieve benefit from exercise get lost in the averages – but to these individuals (and to the clinicians that deal with them) the generalities are utterly irrelevant.

How I do agree with, “To the extent it is useful it is not new, and to the extent it is new it is not very helpful”. I don’t know of anything in positive psychology that wasn’t anticipated by the Third Force psychologies and therapies.

“But as good Jungians, we know the shadow is never far away” – never heard a sentence like that from you, Dr. Dave!

Regarding the question of ‘Jungianism’ (or is Jungian Psychology some kind of religion?), I thought Dr. Naegle gave the perfect answer.

Two side points that stuck out for me: one being Richard using the word ‘ego-ology’, and I really liked that – I think modern psychology is often running far too much along those terms. The other was the subject of religion and the function of a container: I think this is a fascinating topic that hasn’t been much explored, and is a whole discussion in itself.

Cheers!
John

Someone raising social context and its being ignored by the positive psychology lot. (Re-labeled humanistic psychology without acknowledging the source.)

And raising virtues too. Which positive psychology wants to claim – and then embraces training soldiers with little reflection!

There are many more points that I think was just off the mark. But as a whole I would summarize this interview as being biased, logically flawed and border lining hateful towards psychologist and the APA.

Much thanks to interviewer and interviewee for the riveting listen. Keep up the good work!

It should be noted that with respect to human behavior there will be significant changes in effect because of fundamental changes in culture. Perhaps verbal overshadowing’s decreased effect size can be attributed to the drastic increase in the use of social media. It’s one possible explanation other than bad science or poor internal validity.

What I don’t like is that many studies are done that show no effect and are quietly stuffed into the file cabinet of the researcher who conducted the pilot study. I find null results to not only be important but very interesting and useful because the help us poor bastards in the trenches not waste our time and discard our own preconceived notions about how the world works.

The important thing is to remain open minded, to be not only receptive to the idea that may be wrong but enthusiastic about the prospect of being relieved of our most precious delusions. My God, those of us who do this incredibly difficult work can become so full of ourselves. God help me to remain humble and teachable. A great show, I posted the article on my facebook account.

Heck, what an episode – I feel I could write about ten pages on this, but I’ll cut myself off short for the sake of others! Fairy Tale analysis is one of my favourite things too, and John Betts (my initiation into the Jungian world, see jungian.ca) had a lengthy section of his course dedicated to this very subject. The interesting thing about J. Betts’ course is how often he would accidentally say, “in the dream”, rather than, “in the fairy tale”, then call himself out on it, amused, and then pointing out this significance in this, as well as the relevance between fairy tales and dreams.

As for the story you went through here, I found certain parts of it particularly applicable to me, and certain situations I’m going through now.

About the only other thing I feel I can add without going overboard is that I always hated ‘Disney-fication’ as a kid, and genuinely resented the way adults would patronise us with this sanitised, saccharin garbage, and only ever liked the darker stuff. I also remember liking Back to the Future #2 the best, and Mum hating it because it was the darkest and me loving it for exactly the same reason. Being annoyed by all the Disney garbage as a lad, I’d actively seek darker, freakier stuff like Dr. Who, that didn’t speak down to me the way Disney did.

In this sense, and in relation to cultural compensation, I wonder if this is where the current young-teen obsession with vampire stories has come from?

Glad you let the time run long and we could enjoy Tom Elsner’s take on one of H. C. Anderson’s tales.
Actually, it’s the one I grew up with in Russia/Soviet although it’s not a Russian folk tale, of course.

Regarding folk tales from the place of origin, many of the ones we had back in Russia started with a lazy tzar getting intel on something precious in a foreign land and instead of investing in R&D, sending off a few people to try and steal the treasure (often times an apple or a feather of a magic bird). It would involve three brothers, of which the youngest was counted as a fool by everyone (Ivan the fool), but was the kindest one and was in the end the one who would land both the apple and the princess from far away.

Connecting to what your guest said about growing up with certain myths and stories, them dying away, I cannot relate to any such story right now, or when I left Russia for that matter.

I found it amusing that the tzar in the tales always chose to steal what he wanted. I can now give those tales another chance and not take them so literally.

Best,

Irina

As a male with pretty much zero [conscious] paternal instinct (while I desire marriage, I have no urge or desire for children); this episode really drew out many of the feelings and experiences my Anima has been drawing out, which I can only describe as an introduction to the mysteries of nature which can’t really be described in rational, non-paradoxical terms.

I dare say that my paternal instincts are channelled into other areas, especially creative endeavours in writing and music. As for maternal instincts, they’re always something that confused me as someone looking in from the outside, so this is fascinating from a bloke’s perspective!

Timing is really good with this episode, as a single mother (a fellow ECU psych student) and I are in the middle of an email conversation about maternity and male-and-female roles, so I will share this episode for sure.

Oh, and I’ve always wanted to hear you interviewed, Dr. Dave, so I’ll check out that podcast!

Cheers,
John

Perhaps a comparison of Logo Therapy and Analytical Psychology would be another interesting podcast?

Cheers,
John

Thank you very much! I am really glad you enjoyed the podcast and I know you will become even more interested as you read up on Frankl. In addition to the ever-popular Man’s Search for Meaning, I would also recommend to you Man’s Search for Ultimate Meaning and The Will to Meaning to get a more complete picture. The Doctor and the Soul, of course, is good, but a bit more heavy and technical.

As for more podcasts, well….I think if you click on my name, you will find a few more!

I think Frankl and Jung is a fascinating topic! Frankl was younger, so I don’t know if Jung had any opinion of him, or not. I don’t even know if he was aware of Frankl. It seems to me that after his days with Freud, he went his own way and didn’t look back to Vienna.

Frankl, on the other hand, credits Jung for discovering the religious elements in the unconscious, but thinks he was mistaken for considering them to be archetypal rather than existential, and collective rather than person. If I read Jung correctly, it seems he thought that archetypes were empty shells until invested with meaning by the Self, so, unlike many modern Jungians, Jung himself may have been closer to Frankl that in assumed.

Again, I am not sure of my Jung, but wasn’t his notion of the Self more of the totality of all the elements of the psyche? It may be helpful to know that Frankl considered the spiritual or noetic core to be who we are, not something we have, whereas the body and the psyche are things we have, not who we are.

I have a paragraph or two on Jung and Frankl in an eBook that you can find here:
http://homepage.mac.com/mhlewis/overview/materials.html

Otherwise, Frankl deals with Jung at length in Man’s Search for Ultimate Meaning.

All the Best,
Marshall

Thank you so much for your kind words. As I moved into the second half of life, it seems to me as if life called me to Frankl’s work. I certainly didn’t sit down and pick it out of the available options, but it has been a blessing to me. I’m not sure if I am following my bliss, or if my bliss is following me!

I’m glad you talked about the overlap between Jung and Frankl – I wonder what opinion they had of each other? Do you think the internal driving core, incapable of sickening, would be the same part of the psyche Jung referred to as the Self?

Thanks for the question you posted. I’m in the process of putting together the 4th and 5th Jungian CEU packages. The Motherline will be going into one or the other within the next few months.

Best,

David

That notwithstanding, I was blown away by your knowledge of one of my heroes Frankl and learned a great deal from your insight. I have read the Doctor and the Soul and often quote it but I need to re-read it when I don’t have thousands of pages of required reading in front of me. By extension you are held in high regard by myself for honoring Frankl’s work and adding some great insights of your own. There are very few literary works that have to power to change the course and direction of a life like Meaning did. If you start doing seminars, as well you should, I would love the chance to take a more in depth look at his life and work. God bless you for having the courage to follow your bliss and good luck to you in completing the work you are undertaking.

I’ve never been much of a DSM fan, though I recognize it as a necessary evil. If you haven’t already, you might want to check out some of the changes in conceptualization of the personality disorders being proposed for DSM-5, where interpersonal functioning is assessed through measurements of empathy and intimacy.

http://www.dsm5.org/proposedrevision/Pages/PersonalityDisorders.aspx

Frankl wrote a bit about love, too. Much of it can be found in his book “The Doctor and the Soul.” He can explain it better than I can, of course, but he thought of love as one of those irreducible human phenomena, like the will to meaning or the conscience or art appreciation. For him, it was the ability to perceive what another human being was capable of becoming.

Frankl did not believe those who say they are incapable of loving. While humans might numb themselves to love, Frankl would argue that the capability is present in us all, though perhaps left ignored and unused.

I hope you found the interview helpful!

To understand Frankl and his position on animals, I think it is helpful to know that he considered reductionism to have been in part responsible for the Holocaust. When one can think of human beings as nothing but animals, then one can justify treating them as nothing but animals. Therefore, it was quite important for Frankl and remains quite important for logotherapy to emphasize that which is “uniquely human.” Our understanding of what is uniquely human, of course, will be subject to change over time, but I think the bottom line for Frankl was in the human capacity to discover meaning under any circumstances. This Will to Meaning, as he called it, may be responsible for the richness of our symbolic life.

I’m glad you enjoyed the interview!

There was something Mr. Lewis said that I am not sure I agree with, that is the question of whether love can be measured? I have some ideas about how that may be done if it is approached as the capacity to love. There are people that I have encountered, who by their own admission, are incapable of love. Therefore, I feel there may be a common thread with respect to love when viewed as an affective state caused by an underlying responsiveness that is seeded in fundamental thought constructs that are common to those who are capable of love. If this were the case it would just be a matter of coming up with a dependent measure that would predict either the capacity to love or the lack thereof. I think this may be doable and since I am still thinking of ideas for my dissertation in areas that are similar it may be something I can fold into my research.

This may be too ambitious but I am intrigued by the possibility of being able to measure ones ability to love because it would likely be a very good predictor of a particular cluster of Axis II pathology. This in turn could shape interventions that address the underlying causes rather than solely focusing on emotional regulation as a function of positive adaptation and mood affect, Something to think about…

I think it is unfairly neglected (like Rogers in my opinion).

I would like to hear more about the irreducability of the human. (My favourite theory is gestalt, one of whose slogans is ‘the whole is greater than the sum of its parts’.)

The thing that distinguishes the human I think is the richness of our symbolic life. I disagree with Frankl that the higher animals don’t have an (albeit very undeveloped) conscience.

Your comment on the ally, ”one has to nurture and love the ally as well,” reminded me of something I began to grasp last summer but then forgot about: Jung’s autobiographical remark that the entities (all of them) of the unconscious are uninformed about our world. It is like nothing happens down there until we visit them! They are bored to death if they don’t get any news! This may sound like a nifty intellectual idea, but I had a vivid revelation during a shamanistic ceremony that confirmed this intuition on the experiential level. Although extremely powerful, it appears as if many of these beings are in a way starving unless we nurture them with ’soul food.’ (They also seem to have a childish or animal-like way of relating. You know, if a parent has been away from his or her child for too long, the kid may greet the parent with a mix of aggression and clinging, as if to punish the adult for the delay. After a while, the ’quarantine’ is over and they can start to relate normally again. The same seems to be the case with the creatures of the unconscious. The less attention I have payed them recently, the rougher the welcoming. But if I endure, they often become more friendly and cooperative. This goes for dreamwork, active imagination, hypnosis, as well as shamanistic work.)

And if the two worlds are symmetrical, why should one rule the other? It does not make sense. It feels humbling to think that the unconscious also needs our support and cooperation to evolve. It evokes a sense of responsibility and vigilance. Thank you for reminding me.

I loved what you were both saying in regards to big dreams. I had one a few weeks ago involving an autistic child on a swing-set composing and singing a song for me in his own unique language in a beauty that I couldn’t describe that made me start crying (in the dream). When I woke up, I was awe-struck, and later on a friend of mine tried analysing it a little, and for the first time I didn’t really want to analyse it, but instead, just let it be – profound and mysterious.

To then hear you two saying the same thing gave me a warm feeling! Loved Jon’s dreams by the way.

Cheers!
John

I am working on a collaborative exhibition of underwater, night images of mangroves for an immersive video installation work (yes, all symbols of the unconscious) so the discussion of Jung\’s water works … his and your fascination with water play … was particularly poignant. My linked childhood memory was of night spearfishing by underwater light with my father … and this has fueled my creative ideas of late. There was so much in this that was food for my soul. Thankyou from the deepest places in me.

I found Dr Wikman\’s conclusion re the Redbook very interesting – \’the arrival as the Womb\’ makes me wonder … did June Singer explore the parallel female journey to wholeness. Women may come to wholeness from the opposite direction … knowing the connection to the world/earth/being, we are receptive, and have to learn how to be IN the world, how to express and to speak authentically in the outside – to the Other. I would love to hear this explored in deep conversation.

Thankyou again – subtle, perceptive, giving You … and brilliant, open, articulate Dr Wikman.
I love that you keep ego out of SRR
alana

Active Imagination is probably my primary form of psychonautics, but sometimes I get very frustrated with my fellow Jungians, where I feel we should examine the language we’re using, particularly when interfacing with the outside world.

Where Jung would speak of alchemical and mythological material, it would be in the framework of showing patterns – archetypal – and relating it back to psychology, histories of patients, working theories, and so on; taking great care to explain this to the reader. However, I find modern Jungians are often speaking in what sound more like literal terms, which to the uninitiated listener would sound something like, “…the patient needs to channel the spirit of Hercules” (to use some silly hyperbole on my part).

There’s also good reason why Memories, Dreams, Reflections and the Red Book were published after Jung’s death, with them being autobiographical in nature, and not presented as psychological text. However, sometimes it seems modern day Jungians treat these two books and his psychological literature as one and the same (I’m not saying Patricia Damery does), and I can’t help but feel that Jung would likely be worried by the way some of us treat his material in the modern day.

For the sake of balance, I should say I’m in no way ashamed of Jung’s parapsychological experiences as many are (it takes great honesty to record them), but I still feel we of the Jungian persuasion should examine our language and theory a little more closely, in relation to how we present it to the outside world. Many people would see Jungian study on the surface as something not really psychological at all, but simply shamanic and probably nothing more (and many religious people such as myself would be barred from actual shamanic experiences). With Jung’s psychology work, I have no qualms, but with many “Jungians”, particularly in the modern day, I’m really not so sure…

My eventual goal is to undertake Jungian training in Zurich, but would it be expected of me to actually engage in something genuinely shamanic (rather than just Active Imagination and so on) to go through the course? I’d have assumed not, but nowadays, I’m not sure.

Aye, it’s a lovely spot, the neighbours call me Tree Man.

I was about to give several links, but there’s a bunch of reports all in the one spot here, at the Landscape and Human Health Laboratory:

http://lhhl.illinois.edu/

Here’s a paper that explores the physical and psychological benefits of tree climbing, using tower block climbing as a control group:

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1618866705000555

Cheers!
John

I wonder if Jean would be interested in some of the studies available on the positive somatic effects of trees on humans, such as lower crime rates, shorter hospital stays, and more.

While I’m in no way an activist type, I have a particular tree which is very important to me and has a cradle section in which I can space out above the village and watch the sunset. Trees have played a part in my dreams and nightmares, and I only realised later that I had used unconsciously in a religious act. So the depth psychology view on trees really speaks to me.

I wrote an article on tree climbing for adults a while ago, and pieced together some of the stuff mentioned above. If anyone is interested in either that, or (more likely, hehe) a link to the research about the positive somatic effects of trees on humans, I’d be glad to hand on a link.

I had that experience of “oh yeah, that’s what this is like, how could I forget?”. But later on, with the ego back in place and its constraints on personality, I have no idea what my observations were last night!

It was cool to hear about Huxley and Leary – those are some serious bragging rights!!!