"The Myth of Normal"

[Lou Gold]

"The Myth of Normal": Dr. Gabor Maté on Trauma, Illness and Healing in a Toxic Culture

[Federica]

Lou,

Please read what follows as constructive criticism. I think that opening a new thread where you simply throw in a youtube link as a fish hook, no matter how much one might appreciate Gabor Maté - and I certainly do - is a little brash. You could at least make the effort of expressing why you are doing it, opening the discussion in some ways, saying your opinion, or asking a question, even briefly. Why don’t you add any substance whatsoever to your link?
I may be wrong, but in my opinion, if we continue in this direction, when people can open threads to ‘introduce themselves’, to ask nonsensical questions, and now to poke people with their preferred links, I could very soon very well start posting my local supermarket flyers every week, as 'philosophical objets', and nobody would be allowed to complain the least about it. What do you think?

[Lou Gold]

Lou,

Please read what follows as constructive criticism. I think that opening a new thread where you simply throw in a youtube link as a fish hook, no matter how much one might appreciate Gabor Maté - and I certainly do - is a little brash. You could at least make the effort of expressing why you are doing it, opening the discussion in some ways, saying your opinion, or asking a question, even briefly. Why don’t you add any substance whatsoever to your link?
I may be wrong, but in my opinion, if we continue in this direction, when people can open threads to ‘introduce themselves’, to ask nonsensical questions, and now to poke people with their preferred links, I could very soon very well start posting my local supermarket flyers every week, as 'philosophical objets', and nobody would be allowed to complain the least about it. What do you think?

Yeah, you are probably right Federica but I'm glad to hear that you appreciate Gabor Maté. I was following an old practice where Shu would often post videos saying "some might be interested." One of the intriguing questions for me concerns how we might assign notions of individual responsibility in the context of toxic social structures. Is it possible? And, of course, there's the question of the role of compassion in the overall scheme of things. Anyway, have at it. Sharing it was more my interest than argumentation.

[Federica]

Lou,

Please read what follows as constructive criticism. I think that opening a new thread where you simply throw in a youtube link as a fish hook, no matter how much one might appreciate Gabor Maté - and I certainly do - is a little brash. You could at least make the effort of expressing why you are doing it, opening the discussion in some ways, saying your opinion, or asking a question, even briefly. Why don’t you add any substance whatsoever to your link?
I may be wrong, but in my opinion, if we continue in this direction, when people can open threads to ‘introduce themselves’, to ask nonsensical questions, and now to poke people with their preferred links, I could very soon very well start posting my local supermarket flyers every week, as 'philosophical objets', and nobody would be allowed to complain the least about it. What do you think?

Yeah, you are probably right Federica but I'm glad to hear that you appreciate Gabor Maté. I was following an old practice where Shu would often post videos saying "some might be interested." One of the intriguing questions for me concerns how we might assign notions of individual responsibility in the context of toxic social structures. Is it possible? And, of course, there's the question of the role of compassion in the overall scheme of things. Anyway, have at it. Sharing it was more my interest than argumentation.

Ok Lou, if this is praxis, then it's fine, of course. Thanks for elaborating a little : )

[Lou Gold]

Lou,

Please read what follows as constructive criticism. I think that opening a new thread where you simply throw in a youtube link as a fish hook, no matter how much one might appreciate Gabor Maté - and I certainly do - is a little brash. You could at least make the effort of expressing why you are doing it, opening the discussion in some ways, saying your opinion, or asking a question, even briefly. Why don’t you add any substance whatsoever to your link?
I may be wrong, but in my opinion, if we continue in this direction, when people can open threads to ‘introduce themselves’, to ask nonsensical questions, and now to poke people with their preferred links, I could very soon very well start posting my local supermarket flyers every week, as 'philosophical objets', and nobody would be allowed to complain the least about it. What do you think?

Yeah, you are probably right Federica but I'm glad to hear that you appreciate Gabor Maté. I was following an old practice where Shu would often post videos saying "some might be interested." One of the intriguing questions for me concerns how we might assign notions of individual responsibility in the context of toxic social structures. Is it possible? And, of course, there's the question of the role of compassion in the overall scheme of things. Anyway, have at it. Sharing it was more my interest than argumentation.

Ok Lou, if this is praxis, then it's fine, of course. Thanks for elaborating a little : )

And thanks for understanding my intention.

[AshvinP]

Lou,

Please read what follows as constructive criticism. I think that opening a new thread where you simply throw in a youtube link as a fish hook, no matter how much one might appreciate Gabor Maté - and I certainly do - is a little brash. You could at least make the effort of expressing why you are doing it, opening the discussion in some ways, saying your opinion, or asking a question, even briefly. Why don’t you add any substance whatsoever to your link?
I may be wrong, but in my opinion, if we continue in this direction, when people can open threads to ‘introduce themselves’, to ask nonsensical questions, and now to poke people with their preferred links, I could very soon very well start posting my local supermarket flyers every week, as 'philosophical objets', and nobody would be allowed to complain the least about it. What do you think?

Yeah, you are probably right Federica but I'm glad to hear that you appreciate Gabor Maté. I was following an old practice where Shu would often post videos saying "some might be interested." One of the intriguing questions for me concerns how we might assign notions of individual responsibility in the context of toxic social structures. Is it possible? And, of course, there's the question of the role of compassion in the overall scheme of things. Anyway, have at it. Sharing it was more my interest than argumentation.

From my personal experience, I will say the amount of externalizing blame to 'toxic cultures' has grown concerning. At this point, when I speak to my bankrupted clients, there is practically zero hint of, "I dropped the ball and let my finances spiral out of control". Instead, it is all, "I was the victim of predatory lenders, the pandemic, and a million other external factors". People are positively insulted if you even hint that they had a role to play in their own situation (and so I rarely do). Of course, there are many corrupt, predatory, devastating influences out there. But focusing on those provide no possibility for practical spiritual growth. It leads to bitterness, resentment, floods of negative emotions, and stagnation, a negative feedback spiral into the abyss. Compassion certainly has a role to play and should be afforded when possible, but if it's mixed in with indulgence of externalizing tendencies, it becomes counter-productive.

[Lou Gold]

I agree Ashvin and imagine you see lots of inappropriate projected blame in your bankruptcy legal work.

Of course, Gabor Maté is not a spiritual teacher and to his credit he vigorously denies that he is "enlightened." But he is a keen observer of self and others, especially in the field of health. One of the stories he loves to tell about himself is the way his incomplete resolution of his own trauma (lingering scars) will continue to erupt many decades after the event and appear as a strong irritation when the quality or behavior is seen in others. I think it works this way for all of us. It sure does for me and seems most apparent where I'm most critical of others. A parable of a great sage says, when was asked if everyone saw him as wise, he says, "No a thief would just see me as a thief." And, of course, the Master advises to cast the beam out of one's eye before focusing on the mote in the eye of another. I don't think that compassion excuses this but rather sees and seeks a better (more aware) way to resolve the suffering.

[Federica]

I would say it comes down to the question of free will. If we have free will to some extent, we bear responsibility. Does trauma completely erase free will for the average person who lies somewhere in between the edges of the 'trauma spectrum'? Apart from extreme situations, if you don't want to assign individual responsibility, you have to find a way to answer yes to that question.

[Lou Gold]

I would say it comes down to the question of free will. If we have free will to some extent, we bear responsibility. Does trauma completely erase free will for the average person who lies somewhere in between the edges of the 'trauma spectrum'? Apart from extreme situations, if you don't want to assign individual responsibility, you have to find a way to answer yes to that question.

As long as free will is understood as a process of becoming more and more aware, in a more and more full context of set and setting rather than a simple on/off switch as in free/not free. I believe we all agree that none of us are complete and that freedom is an ongoing work. For me, this includes compassion toward myself and others.

[Lou Gold]

I would say it comes down to the question of free will. If we have free will to some extent, we bear responsibility. Does trauma completely erase free will for the average person who lies somewhere in between the edges of the 'trauma spectrum'? Apart from extreme situations, if you don't want to assign individual responsibility, you have to find a way to answer yes to that question.

As long as free will is understood as a process of becoming more and more aware, in a more and more full context of set and setting rather than a simple on/off switch as in free/not free. I believe we all agree that none of us are complete and that freedom is an ongoing work. For me, this includes compassion toward myself and others.

A bit more Federica. I'm thrilled that some have chosen to exercise their free will to develop more and more spiritually. I also sadly recognize that, in the shorter term, extreme situations (events) are likely to be a prime mover of the more social structural process. This will likely create even more reasons for the more developed ones to be compassionate, caring and helpful to others in the process. I think of this as a transition "from me to we." Most likely, it is better understood as an expansion of love.