Imagine two people with the same disease, same treatment, same relative social class. But one gets well, and the other doesn't. A mystery? A coincidence? A situation with multiple explanations? It's a question for which science has no ready answers. Now it appears, we can finally explain it.
We've been exploding some commonly-held assumptions on this show. And that makes for rather provocative stuff. None of us likes our belief systems challenged completely, especially when we feel the challenge impacting one of our bedrock philosophies of life.
But the work of Dr. Norberto Keppe does exactly that. Like Socrates addressing universal values and challenging the thinking of the citizens of ancient Athens, Keppe's work causes us to examine what we know about ourselves. But Keppe also leads us to discover what we don't know about ourselves - and this is a much dimmer journey. Most of us don't know that we are dominated by what we don't know. In this consideratin, strongly held views are best not held to with all you've got. Better to remain open and explore what you don't know yet.
Keppe's work has had a profound effect on many people, including Roberto Giraldo, a Colombian medical doctor and specialist in infectious and tropical diseases. Giraldo is the author of Aids and Stressors, and is currently working at the Weill Cornell Medical Center in New York. But he's beginning the move to Brazil to study more with Dr. Keppe and develop his understanding of the psychological roots of disease.
In this podcast, we explore some of his thinking about the connection between the mind, body, society ... and disease.
Click here to listen to this episode.
Click here to learn more about Podcasts.
Tags: health and wellness alternative health life mind body connections
Absolute junk (your whole podcast) - get a science education.
ReplyDeleteWell, in psychological terms, we would say that you're projecting your lack of scientific understanding onto me. Interesting way to look at it, don't you think? Although probably not a popular one for you.
ReplyDeleteOne more thing ... just because you don't agree with it doesn't make something invalid. If the only listening we do is to validate what we already "know" what's the point? But to challenge your thinking takes an openness to do that. Doesn't sound like you're that interested ...
I enjoyed listening to this very much. You could really spend months researching each of the key points that were covered so well and efficiently in this podcast. I especially enjoyed the examples of how the Freudian archetypes can be externalized onto a whole mass of consciousness or even a country.
ReplyDeleteI am going to quote a section of this podcast for an article on my website if that is okay.
Alex
Oops I mean't to post this under 'psychoanalysis of society' sorry. If there is some way to delete this I will re-post it there.
ReplyDeleteThanks, Alex
Thanks, Alex. You're more than welcome to quote the podcast. I would love to see the article you're writing about this stuff, too. Send me a copy when you have a moment.
ReplyDeleteKeppe's work in the area of socio-pathology is truly stimulating, and we'll be doing more on this subject along the way. I hope you keep listening!
When someone has literally got no idea - it is not worth challenging their views and 'points'.
ReplyDelete"Well, in psychological terms, we would say that you're projecting your lack of scientific understanding onto me. Interesting way to look at it, don't you think? Although probably not a popular one for you."
That doesn't even make any sense? If someone is 'really' showing a lack of scientific education (possibly....most definately you) how can someone state the obvious and avoid your 'projection' statement? You are basically saying 'I know you are, I said you are but what am I?' - a kids response!
Want a psycological analysis, I'll give you one. You are no more than an external shell of smoothness and apparent sophistication. Internally, you really don't know much, can't think for yourself, fear death..and possibly god and believe any mumbo jumbo you hear.
If you want me to challenge something specifically - let me know. Otherwise - i wouldn't know where to start.
Hello again! Let me try to address this as scientifically as possible.
ReplyDeleteYou said: "That doesn't even make any sense? If someone is 'really' showing a lack of scientific education (possibly....most definately you) how can someone state the obvious and avoid your 'projection' statement?"
First of all, what you're saying here is that this doesn't make any sense TO YOU. Fair enough, but why attack me when it's you who doesn't understand? I understand myself completely, as do many others I work with here in Brazil and around the world. Keppe's work is based very solidly on some of the greatest thinkers in history, and his discoveries in psycho-socio-pathology are major contributions to the storehouse of human knowledge. So, I'm not showing a "real" lack of scientific education here - just a different and more complete one than you. You might do well to try to understand rather than just attacking what you don’t agree with. (By the way, what it is specifically you don’t agree with has never been made clear.)
Second, whenever anyone has a strong reaction to something, like you have had to what I've said in my Podcast, we must ask: what do you associate my work in this Podcast with? You've provided some answers, “when someone has no idea”, you’ve called the Podcast “absolute junk”, you’ve suggested I have no scientific understanding, you’ve hinted at ignorance and even stupidity, etc. This means that these are the things you don't want to see in yourself. You are like this, and when you see this problem (by your definition) outside – like in my Podcast – you get furious. You don’t want to see this in yourself, so you attack anything outside that represents that inconscientized element in yourself to avoid seeing it in yourself.
If what we've explored in these podcasts is junk, it won't matter what your opinions (or mine) are about it. But if there's some real truth here (which all of my research here shows me there is – and by the way, I don’t make any points in my podcast without doing a lot of work to make sure I can back them up) then it would be important to think a little differently about it rather than just attacking in a blind, anonymous and unspecific way.
You are certainly right on some things - but very wrong on others. Sure - I should not have made direct personal attacks at you. If you are genuine and are not aware of your inaccuracies - a personal attack is not warranted.
ReplyDeleteWhat you are very mistaken about is that this is about ME. You seem to assume I take a selfish point of view, when in fact mine is far more altruistic. As a science educator and writer, I am constantly battling social endemic conditions such as belief in pseudo-science, the paranormal and religious dogma. Belief in such things within a world that is constantly revealing itself to be purely naturalistic hinders progress and limits human potential. The information in your podcasts is fodder for irrational belief. Perhaps living in Brazil has caused you to lose touch with what is currently happening in the US. Recent polls indicate stats along the lines of 90% of people belive in a personal God and more than half reject evolution (supported in one of your podcasts). George Bush has vetoed stem cell research laws based on an irrational belief system. I could go on...
I hope you can understand that this is certainly not about ME, but rather the uninformed masses that are easily manipulated by the media and anyone with an agenda. Turn on your TV and you will find infomercials about healing bracelets and Sylvia Browne talking with the dead. Do you see where I am coming from?
Hey again ...
ReplyDeleteThanks for your declared altruism in trying to save us from junk science. That was never clear to me in your other posts.
I come from the point of view that there must be an integration again (as there used to be) between philosophy, theology and science. Our current worldview has us totally oriented to materialistic science (if you see it, it exists, if not, it's outside the realm of science). That is what Keppe's Analytical Trilogy is all about, and I stress again, it is not just some random rantings from another deluded mind - which your first comments suggest you believed. This is a very serious philosophical and scientific study over more than 50 years that lays out a different basis to science than the one you are probably standing on.
Just to put your mind at rest, I am in no way advocating healing bracelets and talking with the dead. I don't know where you got that idea, but this is where I think it IS about you. Your reaction was totally out of line with what I am speaking about in my podcasts. Hence my psychological comments. There is something deeper going on inside you and your reactions than you currently perceive. Fair enough ... that's ground I'm pretty familiar with, having to deal with it a lot in my classes here in Brazil, but I think there's more going on in your reaction than you suspect.
But whatever that may be, you have still not specified what it is you see as so delusional and wrong-headed in my podcast. (And why you feel you need to save the world from these views). I'm assuming the program on Darwin is one of the issues here (many scientific thinkers get almost apoplectic at any attempt to question Darwin's dogma), and probably the shows on AIDS were too much for your current perspective on the world.
All I can say in my defense is that there is a basis of logic to what I am discussing, a fundamental world view, that we obviously don't share. I don't really know where we can go from here.
Agree to disagree?