I’ve been thinking about my old group of friends i used to hang with.
Like in most groups, there where flaws. but in comparison to other groups of friends, this one had a lot more.
I am talking about those people who where/are having psychological problems like drug-addiction, Anthropophobia/sociophobia,Verminophobia/bacteriophobia, problems like being (ab)used in their past, a friend sleeping with the wife of the other or having no job. and then the normal problems of brokenhearted and everything that comes with it.
clearly, this isn’t your average group of people i dealt with at the time.
Every individual had it’s problems, but they didn’t only had their own ones, they copied the other problems as well.
This resulted in lower/badder morale, and going in a downward spiral of happiness/ luck.
The only good thing about it was, that we had each other (which was, by the way, maybe not so good after all).
This group, which i left behind me now, is not what i call pathetic people, i think of it like “a group with less then average luck in life”.
Normally, a group makes an individual stronger, but this is just the opposite.
people that destroy the very own structural integrity of the group that helped it build.
i don;t know if there is a term for this in known psychology (i bet there is), but i will call this a flawgroup, just for ease.
I had a few encounters with these kind of groups, and making the tactical mistake to try and help the people in it.
On a larger scale, this happens in certain big cities with a lot of cultural differences in one neighborhood. (for your information; solving these problems is what i do for work now, in The Hague, Netherlands).
This is by letting people think about what they can achieve by combining their strengths, not weaknesses. Giving people opportunities to arrange a festival together for example; with a central point as knowledge-base that makes it a good festival time after time, the people in that neighborhood will feel they’ve accomplished something together, instead of being angry at each other.
The solution for the smaller groups may not vary that much. the only problem is; who can intervene when things go bad? due to the roles in a group of friends, it is hard to let a professional do that job, this is because the group itself has a structure wherein all the roles are filled and people are informal and not formally addressed (which a professional is).
Anyone with a nice solution, be my guest, and post something!
As a follow-up and/or explanation on the first article about this;
Interesting piece of writing here, however, I do have a opinion on this, you can either take it lightly (seeing you don`t always appreciate other`s opinions) or work with it.
here it comes;
In general life, people connect with each other on certain levels and with different goals.
Goals vary from selfish to selfless, and from professional to personal.
reading your article i see you understand the purpose of professional and selfish interactions.
Not to jump to conclusions to quick, but might this be because there is almost always a short-term reward?
This comment is not to discuss why you understand the positive effect on those kind of interactions, but rather to explain that personal and selfless interactions have a more long-term reward.
This reward is often personal, it can be enlightenment because you get to know your not the only one with your current problem/situation, but, it can also give you what they call, secondary-live-experience; knowing where people took a wrong turn in their lives, learns you to take the other turn. this is only possible with interaction on a personal level.
The long-term reward is that you don`t make the same mistakes that are made by other people in your surrounding.
you now might take a defensive position in thinking; but most errors are textbook, or are so common that i won`t make them.
Nothing is less true, you might know the problem, but you only see it when you are already rolled in that particular situation. By knowing different situations from different people you have a wide spectrum of problem-knowledge which makes it possible to recognice a situation before it happens.
this i however only possible with personal interaction with more people.
While i only accounted for problematic-situations here, i i did not spoke of the fact that personal interactions go further than problems.
I am thrilled to tell you that we will make some positive changes in the near future.
Including this changes are the integration of a anti-spam-system and maybe making it possible to discuss posts in a discussion-forum!
Furthermore i wish you all happy blogging and reading!
Jorn (2nd Admin Babbelvis)
- – - – - – - – - – -
Met enhousiasme wil ik mededelen dat we in de nabije toekomst positieve veranderingen op babbelvis gaan maken.
onder deze veranderingen valt onder andere de integratie van een anti-spam-systeem en het discussieren over posts/blogs mogelijk te maken d.m.v. een discussieforum.
Dit te hebben gezegd wens ik iedereen veel lees -en blogplezier.
Met vriendelijke groet,
Jorn (2e Admin Babbelvis)
Voor ik begin, wil ik graag melden dat ik hier uit ga van mijn eigen ervaring als begeleider, vriendenhulp en mezelf als hulpvrager.
Het laatste, wat ik overigens niet geheim hoef te houden, is m.b.t. de hulp die ik krijg bij ADD.
In het begin uitte mijn hulpverleenster zich professioneel, puur zakelijk zoals ik het zag op dat moment, gericht op hoe praktisch het vak van hulpverlener in elkaar zit.
Toen ik eenmaal door de intakes heen was, werd het persoonlijker; er werd gepraat over emoties, mijn verleden, mijn liefdes-leven, mijn verleden van gepest worden en het gothic-zijn/worden etc..
Tijdens deze opeenvolgende gesprekken kreeg ik steeds meer het gevoel dat niet alleen de hulpverleenster dingen van mij kwam te weten, maar ik ook van haar.
Nu kan ik zelf ook wel verzinnen dat dit van uit haar professionalisme de/een manier is om een vertrouwensband met een cliënt op te bouwen.
Toch zou ik als hulpverlener zoveel als mogelijk vermijden te zeggen waar ik ongeveer woon en hoe mijn levens-partner is, laat staan over evt. kinderen die daar bij zijn betrokken. Dit zeker als het gaat om mensen die niet altijd hun eigen acties onder controle hebben.
Ik moet hier wel bij zeggen dat deze manier van een vertrouwensband opbouwen, een goede manier is.
Zelf zou ik het de “voor wat, hoort wat”-manier noemen; je verteld iets over je zelf, waarmee je het ijs breekt en de cliënt zijn zenuwen verminderd.
Ik heb zelf dan wel niet veel geheimen, maar dat betekent niet dat openbare informatie geen eigen leven kan gaan lijden zonder dat je er weet van hebt.
De vragen die ik met deze blog wil opwerpen is eigenlijk; “hoe formeel is professionele hulp, tot hoe ver kan je informeel zijn, en hoe veel kan je prijsgeven”
Deze vragen overigens zijn vooral belangrijk als je zelf in de zorg-sector zit.
Ik hoor in de comments graag terug wat mensen hun ervaringen zijn op dit gebied.
One thing I notice at every turn, is; we live in a strongly ‘interaction based society’. What I mean with this, is that interpersonal interaction is not only encouraged, but stimulated in a number of different ways. I’ll explain what I mean, but first some background information.
I am aware that my views in these blogs are usually not like the general consensus, but still I like the opportunity to explain my point of view, even if no one agrees with it. In its basics, this blog can be seen as an extension of my last blog. I’d like to take this blog to extend on some topics I have discussed in my previous blog.
Right, the interaction based society. The reason I am thinking of this right now, is because I am about to start ‘higher education’, or HBO. This makes me a so-called ’student’. In the package I received from the school, I got a flyer pointing me to an introduction week for students for the city the school is in, Leiden. Seeing I’ve lived next to Leiden, and have gone to school there for the past four years, I don’t think I’ll really need an introduction of Leiden.
However, the introduction is not only about the city. Apparently, the organizers of the whole thing, think it’s necessary to meet new people (also students) and stuff. And then these kinds of groups of students banded together in things like ‘fraternities’ (I am not sure if this is the correct translation, but I’ll use this in the absence of a better word).
This is a prime example of the interaction based society I was talking about. Why, tell me, why is it in God’s name necessary to meet new people? Class mates, fine, but why would you purposefully inject yourself into a new environment with (almost) only new people you don’t know (like the introduction week I was talking about)? What is the freaking attraction to this? I guess it is in the human nature, but it’s ridiculous, so I must not have gotten that gene.
The basic question I’m asking myself here, is; why would you want to know anyone you don’t really need to know? Like I said, if you ‘know’ your class mates (to whatever level, whether you only know their names or other things as well), OK, I can understand that; you get into contact with them during your daily routine (e.g. school). But, what is the USE of being a member of a group of students? Depending on the size of the group of course, chances are most of them aren’t even in the same class! So, WHY, tell me, WHY, would you want to be a member of that group and in your free time, interact with other members when you don’t really need to?!
Like I said before; my views on this subject are the direct opposite of how most people see it. But that hasn’t stopped me from wondering what it is they have, what I don’t (or the other way around). I just don’t see the point, the logic, the added benefit of interacting socially with people you don’t even know. Of course I can understand that if you do happen to get to know someone, that someone can become a friend or an enemy; I’m not that thick. But what I mean is, the point before that. Why would anyone want to MEET new people? I’d say those people are unhappy with the people they already know…
Ok, I’ll stop now, before my inability to understand ruins my mood Just don’t dismiss what I have said out of hand, and think about it. What is YOUR reason for wanting to meet new people? And is it really necessary at all? If you think about that for even a second, this blog will have been worth it.
When you have an opinion about someone else, do you have the right to say this, and/or act on it? I mean this in the most abstract way. Let me explain by using an example.
A prime, although a little extreme, example is are the radical Islamics, such as Al Quaida. They have an opinion and try to force this opinion on other by punishing those who refuse. Of course no one will condone the killing of people, but the basic premise of this is that an opinion is forced on others. Is this, in this way or another, a good or a bad thing?
Why I bring this up, is because of a situation I find myself in quite often. Those who know me a little (and to say, you probably don’t), know I have different opinions about things than most others, most of the time.
Although I don’t often express this difference of opinion, I know I can become very irritated by the actions or opinions of others, when they aren’t the same as mine, especially if that other person means something to me.
My own way of coping with this, is to hide it, keep it ‘inside’. What gives me the right to say what someone else should or shouldn’t do? Nevertheless, this keeping things inside takes its toll. I regard myself as reasonably strong, mentally, but even I have limits.
Without going into too much detail, let’s just keep it an hypothetical situation. It is not in my nature to share information with others, so bear with me as I try to keep this as abstract as possible.
I am not one for social situations. To tell the truth, I hate them. Especially if I don’t already know everyone. I don’t know how to behave, and I especially don’t feel the need to talk to people I don’t know. This makes any kind of social situation extremely taxing on my mental strength and sanity. I think everyone should just do what they have to (school/work/whatever) and spend the rest of their time in their room, whether this is in bed sleeping or behind a computer or TV.
I don’t have the right to say someone else should do this. It’s driving me crazy. What could you possibly do if every fiber in your bone wants to shout out that everyone around you is crazy? It’s a good thing I have a good mental strength, if I say so myself.
So, why do I every time plunge myself in these social situations?
I have no clue whatsoever. Maybe I like to feel agitated and on edge. Maybe I just do it because it’s expected (less likely). Maybe it is because of the misguided dream that I can learn to handle those situations. Maybe it’s just one person in those social situations that gives me the final push to say ‘I will be there’ every time I have an opportunity to avoid a social situation. I can honestly say I don’t have a clue.
Okay, this blog has gotten a bit off track. My central point was; do you have the right to – forcefully – let others know they’re wrong, and you’re right? I am not talking about functional opinions (e.g. if hamburgers make you fat or not) here, but on subjective conjecture (like the example above; everyone should just do what they have to do and spend the rest of their time in their rooms).
In my case, I kind of feel like “Me versus The Rest Of The World”. I am aware that most – if not all – people reading this, as well as in societies around the globe, would disagree with me on this point.
I’m interested to hear your thoughts on what I have said here. Don’t hesitate to post a comment with your opinion (it’s functional, so it’s OK )
First of all, i would like to explain what reminiscence means.
Reminiscence is thinking about (remaining) parts of a certain memory that people have.
Another both big and important part of reminiscence is doing something with that certain memory.
By now you might ask yourself what you can actually do with something you have already experienced in your past. Well, the answer is quite easy.
If you think about a memory, certain emotions might come up, happiness and anger but also closure or a whole learning-process or adjusting the memory (be it about the memory itself or the actions you might not wanna do next time).
People often reminisce about older memories, things that happened long ago.
Traumatic events such as war or near-death experiences are not that seldom to come up. Even though it sounds irrelevant to think of old traumatic events, it can be very useful.
Having met new people to talk about those kind of memories may help. This is because of the fact that those “new” people have an other sight/view on what happened, often the more objective view.
This may help the reminiscing person to adjust to the memories or have at least a little bit closure after opening up about it.
A other event that may occur is adjusting or straightening out the event that happened.
Most memories change in time, this goes parallel with the feeling that comes with it.
Good memories will get better, and that comes with it will often get romanticized.
Neutral/daily memories just happen, and won’t be put into the long-term-memory.
The same thing as with good memories happens with bad ones, although they do not always get worse then they are.
If we however speak in long term, bad memories can fade away, such as the good memories can.
This often depends on how positive or negative the person it self is.
Back to the traumatic events:
Some events may be memorized wrong or incomplete, these events can/may be straightened out while reminiscing together with other people that where at the same event.
A man, who was hiding as a child in war, under his bed, saw his parents getting taken away to a Nazi-camp.
He always remembered seeing a comic book under the bed he hid under.
Many years later he saw the comic book somewhere, and became aware of the fact, that the comic book wasn’t published until years after that traumatic event.
A experiment with people undergoing panic situations showed that in an traumatic event, the human brain is “not thinking straight” and doesn’t always record everything correct and then later filling the missing pieces up with what they think they know about what happened. Which is sad but true, not always what really happened.
This may be due to an automatic fail safe for the human brain, so the person doesn’t have to life with the event.
Which may be reversed when reminiscing about that traumatic event.
Therefore it is advised to talk/reminisce with caution when it’s about traumatic events.
This blog is a tad long, but I hope it was worth your while.
We are slowly getting the website up and running, but, yes, there’s always a but, we are still in search of authors.
If you like to write with/for us, it would be great!
You must of course master the English language a bit, and have a little feeling for it.
It doesn’t matter what you write about, our categories range from science to religion and from politics to psychology.
If you want it, and think you can handle it, put up a post or email me.
With kind regards,
How often do you get the following situation? The times you have got the answer to your question and the following moment in the conversation, only more questions about the subject arise.
In my opinion, it can not be more than natural for a human to raise questions, be it about the unknown,out of curiosity or just for the simple fact that humans are social beings.
There are certainly many different situations where there are questions raised by answers.
For one, which I personally like best, a question to an answer just to make your ‘opponent in the battle of words’ think. Like snapping the conversation back to a grid of useful information.
Another one, which is a good kind of question, is a rhetoric question.
Rhetoric questions, everyone asks them once in a while, be it for sarcasm, or for comforting the other person.
With sarcasm I mean:
Asking to a rocket scientist; So, you think you’re a rocket scientist?
Another kind is the comforting kind of rhetoric question.
This can be for example, asking to a child if he likes it when it is his birthday.
Or a doctor who has a patient, of whom he knows he has a certain disease, and asks if the person has had some first symptoms of that particular disease.
The doctor in this example already knew, but for the client, it is quite a comforting question because the client, by now, knows that the doctor knows about the client his/her situation.
Now i ask myself, does anyone think this way, or am i just the only one?
With kind regards,
It is often said by people that older people do not learn new things. I don’t back this opinion. In my opinion, people always learn in many different ways. From how to react in certain situations, to learn from trial and error in baking cookies for example.
People learn, even if it does not involve a night not sleeping, but studying before your exams. This is explained rather easily; people do something, or to put that in a more politically correct sentence, have interactions with their surrounding area, therefore people get experience in that ’something’, and automatically evaluate the situation, knowing what went wrong, has to change or falls under the category “not for repeation”. The next time people do that same ’something’, they will often do it different, for the better most of time.
People will always have some kind of “personal evolution” when it comes to learning.
When getting older, you more and more realize you are you. But, to the advantage of being a human being, people can adjust their own image, thus doing this by learning about, for example, your own likes, dislikes lifestyle and religion you learn what you like, don’t like, how you want or do not want to dress, how you can react the best to peoples opinion, or that, although you’ve maybe been baptized, you don’t believe in a god or something alike.
Hereby, I think I can say that learning is inevitable when your changing, growing up, getting old, and just living your life as it is.
With kind regards,