(Part 2) Best books about emotional mental health according to redditors
We found 426 Reddit comments discussing the best books about emotional mental health. We ranked the 137 resulting products by number of redditors who mentioned them. Here are the products ranked 21-40. You can also go back to the previous section.
We have one of if not the freest healthcare market in the developed world. The systems that are much further from free market health care are the ones that are 1/2 the cost with better outcomes. When you can only fathom applying more of what doesn't work, you're stuck in an ideological bind.
"Watching politics" is about the least accurate way of understanding why people act the way they do. You might try reading moral and political psychology where they actually study why people believe and push for the things they do with scientific methods. I highly recommend picking up a book like The Righteous Mind or Moral Tribes if you want to begin to understand current political realities more deeply.
I'd love to send you a book that is only so so, but has the most wonderful discussion on the human brain and how we classify information. Throughout childhood and young adulthood we build up neural nets in our brain called attractors. As these build up, they harden, and we "see the world in those dimensions", literally firing off concepts when things match them. BTW, the book isn't about any of the below, it just had that one attractor section.
Both sides of this see things in terms of their attractors. It's why propaganda culture, and ideology works.
You have an attractor in your brain that sees "red". I share that. Most (but not all) of the people here do too.
You have an attractor in your brain that sees "politics" here, I have one that sees "Stuff that people on the conservative dimension in the social sphere see as politics that would be kept out of discussions that are for everyone", and I have one that says "Stuff that people on the progressive dimension of the social sphere sees as 'finally recognizing how much popular culture craps on them'", that for some god awful department of shitty names called privilege.
It takes a bit of mental effort to let both fire, but people can learn to do this, it's called mindfulness. The building up of a set of mutually contradictory attractors that do let a brain settle on a simple conclusion is called nuance, you, and many people, have this in some areas of their lives, but everyone takes shortcuts here, because you can't function if everything is like that. Constant intellectual discomfort is.....uncomfortable.
However, as this is one of my roles, I do keep both of those there in my mind. It's one of the benefits of being around a lot of very different people, you get to understand them and import their viewpoints into your brain.
> politics posts
> it's no ideology
The first of these two statements is something your mind has as an attractor. It feels like change, possibly unwanted change from people who are often dicks as you see change and feel at least intellectual discomfort from fiddling with those other ideas and ways of seeing.
The second is you stating "My brain does not see the ideology". You literally just said "I don't have an attractor for that". The fact you don't recognize "no ideology" as "what's pretty standard for an american of my age, as made by books, movies and propaganda", but there is an attractor in your brain too for this stuff. It's just not well labeled to you. You're not mindful of what it represents.
I believe you, and I believe you that the presence of these ideas causes intellectual discomfort.
Lets talk about a somewhat moderate person the "other side" (not someone who conducts war about it on twitter about it, someone moderate):
We do moderate political speech, "vote for X", "here is a board game about Trump", etc. This probably isn't obvious, as it's been moderated away.
They see what you see as "politics posts" as shit that's always gone on to them which has put them in a one down position from you for decades/centuries/for all time, not politics. Some do take political action around it, but that's not the primary goal. They are publicly saying "I don't like this stuff" or "can we find something better/more elaborate" but they are fundamentally having a different pattern match go off. They have been silent in the past about it because there was not a reasonable space to say negative things without retribution.
They see "it's no ideology" as "that person doesn't see how this shits been hurtful to me". They do see an explicit ideology in modern culture. They start throwing out terms like heteronormativity, privilege and white supremacy, as those are the names, to them, of that "no ideology". It's their attractors. And then tribalism comes out where people start retreating to their nice, uncomplicated in-groups because who needs all this intellectual discomfort and "hey did they just call me a racist by implication?" comes up to people
It's all about the different attractors. You both literally see the world in different ways, and of course you like your way. But that doesn't mean we should just fold into one or the other.
Remember how I said the benefits of being around a lot of different people is that you get to understand them and import their viewpoints into your brain? Be around these people, hear their viewpoints, understand how their brain works, and understand their quiet, unsaid attractors as well. Then for the love of god, use that power for good, understanding how everyone is individually pained.
I recommend the book "Moral Tribes" by Joshua Greene, as he goes over the competing motivations in the brain which might be the cause of this difference.
https://smile.amazon.com/Moral-Tribes-Emotion-Reason-Between/dp/0143126059/
Short version from my own memory, he thinks it's due to the analytic vs emotional aspects of the mind competing for advantage. A simpler version to consider is one where you are standing on a bridge above a train track with another person much larger than yourself, and 100 yards down the line are 5 people who will be killed. You somehow know with 100% correctness that pushing the other person onto the track would stop the train and save the 5 people, but would kill the person you pushed. Ostensibly it's the same situation; do you let five people die, or take an action to kill one person instead?
Most people say they would flip the lever and kill the one person instead of the five, but most people (except for some with specific types of brain damage) would not push the person off the bridge. The key difference between the two examples seems to be the active and personal participation of the person being asked in the second case, and how it triggers a more significant emotional reaction in the brain.
When flipping a switch to reroute the train, the analytical mind considers the pros and cons, sees that the net benefit supports pushing the level, so they agree to do it (most of the time). There is emotional involvement, but it is at a distance.
When being faced with personally pushing someone into the path of an oncoming train, emotion is much stronger, and swamps out the logical decision making process. You're not pushing a metal rod from a dispassionate distance, you are actively choosing to manhandle a person into harm's way. When asked, people will even say that pushing the man is the logical thing to do, but they still wouldn't do it. IIRC, the most common reason given was "It's wrong."
I remember reading Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance when I was about 20 (so about 8 years ago) and although I thought the book was great, I couldn't quite grasp the deep philosophical musings that were going on within it.
It's a book I've promised myself that I'll read in another 10 years or so and see if I can get to grips with it any better!
Lack of empathy. I'm reading http://www.amazon.com/Science-Evil-Empathy-Origins-Cruelty/dp/0465023533 right now and it's pretty neat actually.
Preface: This is my first post and it ended up rather larger than I intended, but such is the nature of this subject matter. Additionally please forgive any spelling/grammar errors, I am far from perfect in this regard and have come to rely too heavily on auto correct which constantly misses "to vs too" and so on... Bellow crept into my honours thesis when it was supposed to be below, you end up reading what is in your head not what is on the page, and for that I appologise in advance. Gulp Here goes the submit button.
I am doing my PhD thesis on something in this area (I am a philosopher) and thought I would just give my $0.02... which is actually a bit steep for what its worth. There is a way out of this "pathological trap" I think but it requires a fundamental overhaul of the way we treat the social sciences as a whole. There is essentially two things going on in what we label "social science" one is immutable and unchangeable and that is science, the other is closer to a social strategy than anything else. If a theory depicts the best strategy in a social situation it is not a science, it is a strategy, it does not tell us this is how things are, only that this is something we could choose to do. A lot of people seem to be confused by the difference. A scientific theory by itself is ethically neutral, it either is or is not the case. A strategic theory is not so disinterested, it is something that may be willingly acted upon with our own free will and the fallout of those decisions is on we, the actors.
To give an example, we know thalidomide works on suppressing nausea, and there was a time we did not know it caused birth abnormalities. So a strategy was devised. Given what we know about thalidomide we should use it to treat morning sickness. Strategy worked, really well, and 9 months latter had unforeseen repercussions. We would nail a doctor to the wall for administering thalidomide in this day and age to a pregnant women, s/he could not hide behind "its science and thus ethically neutral!" the strategic decisions of the doctor make him/her morally culpable.
Now the undergrad economists out there will shout "but where are you going with this, thalidomide has side effects, there are no side effects with neoclassical economics" while the post grad economists will shake their heads at them (not in all but in some cases, most undergrad economists I know are very sure of their discipline while most post grad and lecturers are much less so). Neoclassical economics (or more precisely in this case, the self interested "rational" agent) has essentially created a gigantic prisoner's dilemma, and the mantra is "fuck less yee be fucked" (again, granted not in all cases but usually where issues like these arise)
I can imagine two opposing cries from the same field, one saying "but that's just a model to facilitate prediction!" and the other saying "you obviously are misrepresenting "self interested" it is just to facilitate an agents unknowable motives!"... but this is confusing which is it? something definite we can use for prediction or a place holder because we cannot predict humans? It cannot be both, one of these options supposes that we are going to get reliable results from it, the other that we just call whatever happens "self interest" and have no way of knowing what will happen, or that we will just confirm all the results we get after the fact. (I cut some info here about Thomas Reid and his theories on Credulity and Veracity, I will link it in the reference at the end) It is in actual fact a worst case scenario, when Adam Smith used his butcher baker brewer example it was an appeal to their self interest not because they will not respond to anything else, but because it has more chance of working in worst case scenarios as well as best case scenarios and everything in between. This is a strategy, and I must admit a rather compelling and persuasive one. Here in lies the reflexivity, which is the amount a strategy is persuasive in terms of the decisions we make in the real world, that have a direct impact on the results predicted by the strategy. (Sorry that is rather confusing... "What will really cook your noodle later is would you still have broken it if I hadn't said anything?" - The Oracle - The Matrix [sorry if that's a misquote no time to go back and watch it again])
Sandri has done experiments into this area in ultimatum games, PD games and so forth, turns out that you are more likely to follow the expected results when you know what the expected results are and why. Who would of thunk it aye? I am not suggesting that if you learn about capitalism you will instantly be transformed into a monster or even that it is a sure thing, just that the arguments/strategies generated from what you learn are now part of the internal deliberative process when it comes to decision making in the area it is concerned with... it had damn well better be or what is the point of studding it? The point I am trying to make is that the results change after people have learned about the theory and the expected results... if it was a science they would not, only game theory and strategies do this. These are better models for understanding, explaining and predicting behavior for social strategies than some idealism of absolute knowledge, luckily we kind of recognise this.
So I mentioned there was a way out?
Well as the champion of neoclassical economics (Friedman) once put it in a paper on positive economics, the predictive power of a theory is more important than the assumptions that go into it, now I disagree completely but I cannot fault his reasoning... he just has his assumptions wrong. So knowing that knowing a theory makes you more likely to pursue it (the exact amount of which varies from theory to theory, even its valance changes but I wont bother with that here) and that it is a strategy and the actors employing that strategy should be morally culpable just like the thalidomide doctor. This in turn alters the weights in the game, I could choose to fire those employees and get a pay rise and call it efficiency, oh but my science is now widely recognized as a strategy and knowing that, I am also a fuckwad for doing it. But first why would it be widely recognized as a strategy? And second why should I care if I am a fuckwad?
First: predictability, we can get more accurate results, by treating the strategies as strategies rather than sciences. Sure we also need to admit that employing these strategies makes us ethically responsible but that's a small price to pay for more accurate predictions right?
Second: Because people don't actually like to be fuckwads in general (outside of the internet and high school I mean)... it's a ghost, a boogieman, none of my friends act like the self interested rational agent to the point of being a fuckwad, well ok may be once or twice but they are usually repentant and remorseful for it (myself included). However, what about all of them out there? Just because I have overwhelming experience completely contrary to this construct does not mean that the rest of the world is not out to get me! I just happen to know the best people on the planet and the rare few. So it is ok if I am a fuckwad to those strangers out there because they would of been a fuckwad to me right? No, of course not, it is unacceptable for anyone to be a fuckwad. Fuckwad is not the norm we should strive for, no matter what the strategy tells us. But this reflex stems from the very understandable desire "not to be the chump" to take Robert Franks words.
Not all of these strategies are bad mind you some strategies are really good (even within neoclassical economics, and capitalism as a whole) for everyone and these now (after we accept them as strategies and have accounted for reflexive influence... not going into that here) have probably a greater weighting, given the new information, we may finally stop prescribing thalidomide to pregnant women.
Are there tons of holes in this argument, sure. But cut me some slack I kept it under 1000 words... well I did initially now I check it it is around 1500. Also it may sound like I am picking on neoclassical economics here and its not really my intention, it is the strategies that it generates and their persuasive nature, even then this in itself is neither good nor bad till some one actually acts on them. And all of the social sciences have some amount of strategies within them and the reflexivity entangled with that.
Some of the things/people/articles referenced not putting up a proper bibliography here as it seems to me this may be more productive in giving credit for those that lack access to JStor and the like.
http://www.amazon.com/Reflexivity-Economics-Experimental-Self-Referentiality-Contributions/dp/3790820911 Sandri (warning horrably esoteric and dry read... very informative but yeah... it's a hefty price for eye sand paper.)
http://www.amazon.com/Wealth-Nations-Bantam-Classics/dp/0553585975 Smith (also available on Project Gutenberg, I think so many people quote the bits that help them and ignore the gigantic tracts that condemn them from this)
http://www.amazon.com/Essays-Positive-Economics-Phoenix-Books/dp/0226264033 Friedman (The guy was brilliant I cannot take that from him, Samuelson disagreed and so do I and they managed to remain friends and civil. I wont reference any Samuelson here as it is not really relevant to the current discussion out side of the "scientification" of economics by the mathematisation and formalising of economics.)
http://www.amazon.com/Passions-Within-Reason-Strategic-Emotions/dp/0393960226 Frank (Cracking read)
http://www.amazon.com/Inquiry-Human-Principles-Common-Sense/dp/0271020717 Reid (Another Cracker and well ahead of its time I think, Also I have just discovered I have lost my copy.)
http://www.amazon.com/The-Matrix/dp/B000HAB4KS (For the hell of it)
*Edited Spelling/Grammar/Matrix ref
Thanks for making it this far.
Wookiee
Ditto to Man's Search for Meaning. I also found Love's Executioner by Irvin Yalom to be amazingly life affirming. He's an existential therapist and the book is a collection of fictional stories about patients and his sessions with them - written to exemplify his take on existentialism and how it can be used to positively change people's lives. It's also very accessible - no dense philosophical jargon. I very highly recommend it, especially if you're in the middle of a crisis.
ho comprato il libro How Emotions Are Made: The Secret Life of the Brain dopo aver visto il Ted talk dell'autrice. Spero sia abbastanza facile da leggere perché l'argomento è veramente interessante.
This reminds me of a chapter from Love's Executioner: & Other Tales of Psychotherapy
A rich accountant retires and he suddenly starts to develop migraines and has problems with impotence. He has no idea where the problem is coming from. He and the therapist (author of the book) eventually discover that the timing of the migraines/impotence almost perfectly coincides with his retirement date.
They eventually discover that all his life, all he did was try to make more money and acquire more stuff. He never took any time to develop his character or think about bigger questions like "what am I working towards?" and "how do I bring more meaning into my life?" Once he retired, the focal point of his life disappeared and there was basically nothing left to fill the gap. All the stuff he acquired (predictably enough) meant nothing.
I guess if you fail to cultivate yourself and work on yourself, it's eventually going to catch up to you. One of the most common times that this "catching up" occurs seems to happen after retirement and via "empty nest syndrome." The empty nest situation is much like retirement. For most parents, kids are their greatest source of meaning and once the kids go off on their own, they suddenly realize that they have nothing to fill the gap. They have no real hobbies and they never really developed themselves and created more identities other than "good parents."
I have no idea where I was going with this. Your comment triggered a flurry of thoughts that I thought would be relevant!
Yes in fact! Just recently the Norwegian philosopher Lars Svendsen published a study called 'A Philosophy of Boredom' (https://www.amazon.co.uk/Philosophy-Boredom-Lars-Svendsen/dp/1861892179) which covers all of the various philosophical views on boredom, including Heidegger and Kierkegaard. From what I've read of it, it's pretty easy to follow and his references all check out - as good a place as any to learn more imho
Hope this helps!
The argument of logic vs beauty is an old one and dates back as far as ancient greece :)
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Zen-Art-Motorcycle-Maintenance-Anniversary/dp/0099322617
Have a read of this if you want a modern interpretation of the underlying unity of the two concepts.
I like the definition of evil as the lack of empathy and willingness to do harm to others. This was a good book on the subject http://www.amazon.com/Science-Evil-Empathy-Origins-Cruelty/dp/0465023533
Here are a couple of really good books:
If you do like the show Lie To Me, the main character is based on Dr. Paul Ekman, who wrote Emotions Revealed. He has a series of web-based trainings on his website:
http://www.paulekman.com/
Books?
Something related
Something unrelated
Something really good
Nah, it's a real thing. Lack of direct human contact in infants causes a deficiency in growth hormones & homeostasis. Some infants die. Many more end up with mental illness.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18096809
edit: I went and looked up sources for this comment, but I first read about it in the fascinating book A General Theory of Love
If a person, holding to account is a different issue. I don't have an overly developed understanding of it. I'd like to think you could make a claim against someone and the agency is authorized after a judgement is made to dispense equal punishment. But that does not absolve the enforcement agency from in turn violating the next person's rights. Meaning, if the judgement is based on faulty claims, the enforcement agency should be in turn be held to account for their violation of someone else's rights.
I think most of collectivism stems from envy. And fear of being envied.
There's an old but enlightening book on the topic of envy
https://www.amazon.com/ENVY-Theory-Behaviour-Helmut-Schoeck/dp/0865970645
I experience basically the same inattentive symptoms and anxiety too. I’m not hyperactive but quite fatigue throughout the day so my motivation is quite low.
Anyways, I’m not sure of any apps but I do know a great workbook that has been quite helpful for me, which was suggested by my therapist. It would be even better to use it with someone so you have someone to be accountable to and check in with.
[Mastering Your Adult ADHD](Mastering Your Adult ADHD: A Cognitive-Behavioral Treatment Program Client Workbook (Treatments That Work) https://www.amazon.com/dp/0195188195/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_PeSMBbE3XETX3)
Six Days. Re-loving a Broken Heart
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07RN8PVST
FREE until May 21st
> Have you ever experienced a broken heart that really stopped you from living?
>In this inspiring memoir about moving on after a shattering separation, Tita Alissa Bach invites the reader on an encouraging journey, sharing her personal quest for healing and uncovering the forgotten secret on how to feel love again.
---
The Little Black Book of Out of the Box Investments
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07RQC3ZYV
FREE until May 22nd
>
“Hope Is Not A Strategy.” - Vince Lombardi
>Investing in stocks, managing your funds and building wealth might not seem as physically challenging as professional football, but it can be even more demanding. Especially if you do not have the right strategy.
>That is exactly why you need an all-inclusive trading and investing guide.
Other comments have talked about the medication topic (trying to adjust your dosage if it's not enough or switching medications), so I'm going to focus on being able to do habit-forming, as that's often a difficult task even once medication's figured out.
It sounds like you've already identified the things you need to be doing and the things you end up doing instead of that first group, which is a start. The next step is that you've got to start enforcing the rules you're trying to set for yourself and hold yourself accountable to them right then and there. Some things I see from your description of a day that could be useful:
Most importantly, you've got to let go of the anger and remember that you can do this. If you started doing all or some of this tomorrow, that's day 1 of working to be better, not day 500 of being terrible at it. If you only do half of them on day 1, that's still more progress towards your goal than you had on day 0. You'll get better at consistency, you'll get better at holding yourself accountable when you fail but being fair about it, and will start to be able to define the more specific things that work for you rather than this long-winded advice from a stranger on the internet.
A lot of the above came from things I learned while working with a cognitive behavioral therapist (while I was finding medications) and this book. If you think it'd be helpful and can't afford it, PM me shipping info or a wishlist link and I'll buy you a copy. I've been where you are, and it does get better.
(edited to correct a typo I didn't notice I'd made at first)
Robert Frank, an economist, wrote an excellent boom on the subject of emotions called "Passions Within Reason." that might be useful to answering your question. Basically, Frank theorizes that emotions are a "commitment device" that lead us to behave in certain ways that are beneficial. The book also starts off with the most entertaining and enlightening account of your American clan rivalry between the Hatfields and the McCoys. It's worth reading for the first ten pages alone. Here is a review that does his argument in this book more justice than I have above.
There is mountains of evidence to support the fact that upbringing and parenting plays a very large role in the wiring of a child's brain.
http://www.npr.org/2011/01/10/132740565/closing-the-achievement-gap-with-baby-talk
http://psychcentral.com/lib/2007/how-children-develop-empathy/
http://www.psy.miami.edu/faculty/dmessinger/c_c/rsrcs/rdgs/emot/McDonald-Messinger_Empathy%20Development.pdf
http://www.amazon.com/The-Science-Evil-Empathy-Origins/dp/0465023533
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychopathy#Environmental
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_functions
Do you hang out with lifestyle designers? Retirees?
Have you read the book Meet Your Happiness Chemicals? https://www.amazon.com/Meet-Your-Happy-Chemicals-Endorphin/dp/1463790929
It sounds like part of the issue is that you don't have the same social network or list of goals that you used to.
Think about each area of your life - health, work, relationships, lifestyle - then set goals and award yourself points in that area.
When it comes to work, what makes you mad as hell or happy as hell? Apply the skills that made you good at a job to solving some big social problem.
As an example (and I am speaking from experience the first semi-retirement I had after divesting a business) - I calculate how many days I had remaining if I lived to be 100. Then I said, okay if I help just 1 person a day solve [insert problem], how good would I feel.
Nothing feels as good as someone saying "I'm so glad I met you" or "you changed my life". So, assuming you are awake 16 hours a day, if you allocate just 25% of that - 4 hours a day - to adding some contribution to the world, you will feel great.
Next there's relationships. You can easily enjoy 4 hours a day just chatting with friends and socializing - the trick is you are going to need a new social circle. It is what it is.
Then there's leisure - what hobbies ( land, sea, air), or cultural interests excite you.
Then there's places. There are 190+ countries in the world. Where do you want to go when it comes to exploring the world with your family?
The challenge is most people haven't taken the time to get to know themselves. It might take you a good 6 months to a year to get to know yourself.
Also try some personality / strengthfinder tests (I've invested over $300+ dollars and did about 7 of them).
After check out a tool like coggle.it or process.st and mindmap it all.
Then create a checklist and track it.
Like a director right out a script of how your perfect day will go.
As an example, my perfect day included watching the sunset, panoramic ocean views, low population density, low traffic, very little standing in line.
Granted I had to move 2300+ miles and abroad to get there but guess what?!
You feel like a demi-god when you literally write your own script and at least 75% of the time your life looks just like that.
It helps to have other buckets like:
Google Jim Rohn's "circle of 5". I think you're going to find it hard to feel content in your relationships if you don't have at least 1 or 2 FIRE friends (or at least business owner friends who have as much freedom as you do) because we need to feel connected in life.
There are literally thousands of FIREs around the world whose lives our brimming with a sense of excitement and urgency because there is so much to do and so little time.
And I am single (for now) with no Kids. The former will probably change in a few years, but I wouldn't think of being with a guy who didn't love freedom or didn't have a laundry list of things that he felt passionately about outside of traditional work.
I hope this provides a different point of view.
Excuse any typos I am supposed to be meditating so have to run.
Oh also this is a great video on how to script your perfect day (I go as far as having a checklist of my daily habits, daily happiness habits etc, and at the end of the day I rank myself. As an example there's a certain social problem I want to help solve - has alot to do with wealth education not being taught in the school systems, lifestyle engineering, entrepreneur education being broken etc - and each day I ask myself how close I am getting to that goal. Another one is film finance. I have alot of time to watch film so I also have a set of goals around finding indie films to to go in on when it comes to crowd funding. Another is books. Are there books you want you have always wanted to read? Movies? Music? Seriously I have been up for like 4 hours the day is almost gone and it's pregnant with opportunities in terms of things I'd love to get done but can't.
Lastly again (and I know I am rambling), you've got to have people you can connect with - on facebook, slack, skype, phone, text - etc either who are FIRE or trying to get there to share the experience. It's unlikely to be as sweet as it can be without them. Having a spouse who is on board helps but you also need that friend social circle....
(the video I mentioned on "Perfect Day Design" - it's a little cheesy the title, but give it a shot)...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8aD01ndbRRo
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Zen-And-The-Motorcycle-Maintenance/dp/0099322617/ref=wl_it_dp_v_nS_nC?ie=UTF8&colid=1ZUCEHKOSGDQS&coliid=I1LX69VJPFR92N
i want this book because ive heard good things about it
If I were a book, I hope that I'd be a great one.
You might want to check out Relational Frame Theory and/or Acceptance and Commitment Therapy for a take on some of the more recent research/interventions. These are really popular among the professors in my university's psychology department right now.
This Honestly Hits home for me. I am sensitive to meds.
I recommend you read Driven to Distraction , Skip the first parts about diagnosis, and get to the living suggestions.
There are a few CBT guides that help with ADD, I recommend this one it worked for me. + if you can afford it a therapist trained for ADD would be a good resource.
This book is $3.04 CAD :)
This one is $3.34 CAD which is $3.01 USD. :)
My favourite pie is Flapper Pie, but I can't find a vegan version :( My second favourite is strawberry rhubarb! Happy Pi Day! :D
Vegan here! :)
I have two beautiful, sweet, and often annoying kitties ruling my house because they had nowhere safe to live. I have crazy cat allergies, but they're worth it :) if I had the money, I'd love to open up a little "Farm Sanctuary" for my area, there's not much for helping farm animals up here. At one point I was accepted to veterinary school but decided against it: I couldn't take knowing what horrible things people did to animals :(
My favourite food is, like globalso's, chana masala. So delicious!! I'm also fond of lentil salad, and any sort of bean stew. :) ooooh, and walnut-balls! (Like meatballs but with crushed walnuts and so much tastier!)
I would love a (used) copy of [this book] (http://www.amazon.ca/The-Pig-Who-Sang-Moon/dp/0345452828/ref=wl_it_dp_o_pC_S_nC?ie=UTF8&colid=O1LXGBSWEL62&coliid=I5ZHKOXWPF78W)
Hugarabbitday (every day!) :D great contest!
Here are all the local Amazon links I could find:
amazon.com
amazon.co.uk
amazon.ca
amazon.com.au
amazon.in
amazon.com.mx
amazon.de
amazon.it
amazon.es
amazon.com.br
amazon.nl
amazon.co.jp
amazon.fr
Beep bloop. I'm a bot to convert Amazon ebook links to local Amazon sites.
I currently look here: amazon.com, amazon.co.uk, amazon.ca, amazon.com.au, amazon.in, amazon.com.mx, amazon.de, amazon.it, amazon.es, amazon.com.br, amazon.nl, amazon.co.jp, amazon.fr, if you would like your local version of Amazon adding please contact my creator.
Banksy didn't originate that quote either. He just re-publicized an age-old idea. Much like everything he does.
You should read this book some time. Published in 1989 and says the same thing as the Banksy quote. And chances are, somebody else said it before then too...but we can safely assume that they weren't some sensationalized graffiti artist.
You might be interested in Robert Frank's Passion Within Reason: The Strategic Role of the Emotions.
The basic idea is that love can function as a precommitment device, ensuring better long-term outcomes for both partners.
I just read a book about this. The interoceptive part of our brain takes in sensory information and makes predictions for regulating our body. Depression is when prediction is too high, you have too many negative memories so your brain says let's do nothing. Anxiety is the opposite, too much sensory coming in and prediction is too low.
The Political Brain: The Role of Emotion in Deciding the Fate of the Nation
You're still going to find more constructive ways to disagree. Give it a chance.
This is the first official episode of the Chameleon Philosophy Podcast. This episode of the podcast covers the intersection of evolutionary history and moral thought. I cover many different thinkers who will be linked below. This podcast also goes into the fundamental disagreements of utilitarian theory and moral pluralism on the subject of human emotions and their importants within our own ethics.
If you have any comments or questions please email me at [email protected]
Tamler Sommers:
https://www.amazon.com/Why-Honor-Matters-Tamler-Sommers/dp/0465098878
https://www.amazon.com/Relative-Justice-Cultural-Diversity-Responsibility/dp/0691139938/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=Relative+Justice&qid=1556116613&s=books&sr=1-1
https://www.amazon.com/Very-Bad-Wizard-Morality-Curtain/dp/0415858798/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=A+Very+Bad+Wizard&qid=1556116655&s=books&sr=1-1-catcorr
https://verybadwizards.fireside.fm/
Robert Wright:
https://www.amazon.com/Moral-Animal-Science-Evolutionary-Psychology/dp/0679763996/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=The+Moral+Animal&qid=1556116727&s=books&sr=1-1
Peter Singer:
https://petersinger.info/
https://www.amazon.com/Ethics-Real-World-Essays-Things/dp/069117847X/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=Ethics+in+the+real+world&qid=1556116779&s=books&sr=1-1
Jonathan Haidt:
https://philpapers.org/rec/HAITED-2
Bob Frank:
https://www.amazon.com/Passions-Within-Reason-Strategic-Emotions/dp/0393960226
William MacAskill:
https://www.effectivealtruism.org/
Only if they want to not suffer the consequences of not being good.
Society and moral behavior is a delicate balance of cooperation and competition. Cooperate 100% and you're a doormat, compete 100% and the rest of society will exile/kill you.
Millions of years of evolution as a social ape has instilled a basic set of morals into us which has helped our species survive through the ages. That's what "basic" morality is, and it even shows up different on brain scans than more "advanced", culture-trained morality.
http://www.amazon.com/Moral-Tribes-Emotion-Reason-Between/dp/1594202605
From a (critical) review:
>Utilitarianism, he contends, is not refuted by footbridge-type intuitions that conflict with it, because those intuitions are best understood not as perceptions of intrinsic wrongness, but as gut reactions that have evolved to serve social peace by preventing interpersonal violence. Similar debunking explanations can be given for other commonsense moral intuitions, such as the obligation to favor members of one’s own group over strangers, or the stronger obligation one feels to rescue an identified individual who is drowning in front of you than to contribute to saving the lives of greater numbers of anonymous victims far away. According to Greene, it is understandable in light of evolutionary psychology that we have these intuitions, and for the most part it does no harm to let our conduct be guided by them, but they are not perceptions of moral truth, and they do not discredit the utilitarian response when it tells us to do something different.
>While we cannot get rid of our automatic settings, Greene says we should try to transcend them—and if we do, we cannot expect the universal principles that we adopt to “feel right.” Utilitarianism has counterintuitive consequences, but we arrive at it by recognizing that happiness matters to everyone, and that objectively no one matters more than anyone else, even though subjectively we are each especially important to ourselves. This is an example of what he calls “kicking away the ladder,” or forming moral values that are opposed to the evolutionary forces that originally gave rise to morality.
I HIGHLY recommend reading "Meet Your Happy Chemicals" or it's new title "Habits of a Happy Brain" by Loretta G. Breuning. It's written at sort of a middle school level, but it pretty well explains why our brains are basically out to get us because in the wild contentment = death. So we are always a little agitated to keep ourselves propelled toward working on whatever the our brain tells us that we need to do to bridge the gap between our present and some imagined greener pasture. I haven't even done some of the exercises, and yet reading the book has made me SO MUCH MORE CHILL. My favorite was one of the "postcards to your brain" at the end which said "People are secretly respecting you behind your back. You might as well feel good about it."
And for back-up, there's "Happy Chemicals"
http://www.amazon.com/Meet-Your-Happy-Chemicals-Endorphin/dp/1463790929/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1382385239&sr=1-2&keywords=serotonin
EDIT: Joke! This is one reason I asked reddit for suggestions - amazon wasn't helping.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0865970645?pc_redir=1413777833&robot_redir=1
Person, hands down. Doesn't mean that we don't play together. But I never want to be in the business of objectification. I want the full nine yards.
EVERYONE is a person. They have wants, desires, needs, and HUMANITY. The good, the bad, the exciting, the mundane, the hilarious, the fantastical, etc. I want it all.
Entertainment is temporary until the next, slightly more absurd thing comes along. I want to peer into someone's soul and see them for all that they are.
Going to check these out, thanks!
Have you read The Emotional Brain? It seems to be popping up in looking up the other two and may be a nice one to add, but I haven't read that one either.
When taken purely metaphorically, I somewhat agree with your theory.
From a spiritual/emotional perspective there is a (neural) war going on between "enlightenment" and emotional repression, between love and fear, between freedom and oppression.
In an emotionally repressed person, the cortex is constantly repressing impulses from the more "primitive" parts of the brain. (See for example "The Emotional Brain" by LeDoux.) Ultimately these repressed emotions and traumas will effect a persons behaviour without them realizing it. This makes a repressed person easier to control. It also makes them less effective at a lot of things, because the brain wastes a lot of energy on repressing emotions and memories.
Facing your traumas and embracing your emotions makes you more effective at a lot of things and more aware of why you might act in certain ways, making it easier to regulate your own behaviour. IMO this will also make you less susceptible to any form of mind control, ranging from coercive persuasion as done by cults to electronic forms of brain washing and influence. It also makes wiping your memory, which I believe to be possible to some extent, much harder.
I think many TI's are being targeted because they have strong natural tendencies towards "enlightenment", towards not being emotionally repressed. The powers that be want a world where people can be controlled. This means keeping them as fearful as possible. They perceive enlightenment as a threat to their plans and wish to eradicate it completely. They also don't want anybody involved in electronic mind control to find out how resistant and effective enlightened people are, which is why they have to be repressed and kept debilitated 24/7.
If you'd like to deal with childhood traumas or repressed emotions in a constructive way, I'd personally recommend the Past Reality Integration (PRI) techniques by Ingeborg Bosch, or some other form of therapy based on primal therapy.
The Pig Who Sang to the Moon. I read that about 10 years ago and have been vegetarian ever since.
I am old enough to remember the 1950s and the Red Scare mentality so dominant at that time. Anyone else remember, for example, the hysterical warnings that commies want to control every detail of our lives right down to the time we have to set our alarm clocks? I remember. I think that Bernie Sanders would have been totally buried under a massive red-baiting campaign by the Republicans if he had been the Democratic nominee.
Anyway, those struggling to understand this election might want to read Jonathan Haidt's The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion and Joshua Greene's Moral Tribes: Emotion, Reason, and the Gap Between Us and Them.
I doesn't sound like your problems here stem from religion at all, it sounds like both of you have some pretty deep emotional issues that are not being addressed and that are controlling the situation.
Avoiding reality the way she has, and frankly your own decision-making process, is indicative of some pretty deep-seated issues. The religion is just a manifestation, a symptom.
If you want to stay together, I urge both of you go see therapists, probably separately to start with and preferably not the same therapist. If she only wants to see a Christian therapist or whatever, that is fine as long as they seem reasonable. Anything to get her working on it. If she won't go (or her controlling, psycho mom won't "let" her), you get your ass in therapy by yourself.
I would also VERY strongly recommend a book, Love's Executioner. It has nothing to do with romance but may make you feel better about how completely derailed your relationship has come.
Again, the problem here isn't religion. It's you two, both individually and together. Good luck.
How Emotions are Made, The Brain: The story of you, Incognito. Also maybe Gene.
I second the comment about Paul Eckman; he is a little hard to read sometimes but his ideas rock!
check out this E-book on the primary facial expressions. Hope it is helpful
http://www.amazon.com/Unmasking-Face-Wallace-V-Friesen-ebook/dp/B002NGO5IC/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1406488544&sr=8-4&keywords=eckman
Are you getting any treatment aside from medication? If not you might want to combine your medication with ADHD therapy/coaching and/or focus on developing coping skills.
There's this mindfulness for ADHD workbook and also this Cognitive Behavioral Therpay for ADHD workbook. I haven't used them but they look like they might be useful.
The book 4 Weeks to an Organized Life with AD/HD was very helpful to me when I read it several years ago. The second half of the book is a 4 Week program that gives one simple task a day to help build skills to cope with ADHD (you don't have to read the first half of the book, you can just do the program). If you choose to do this, you might want to ask someone to help remind you to do the daily exercises and be your accountability buddy.
As far as reading goes, I find that writing a paragraph summarizing what I read right after reading helps me to stay interested in what I'm reading. I would guess it might help with other hobbies too.
I bought as many books as I could on DBT and ACT not all at once only when I could afford it.
I started by reading http://www.amazon.com/Cognitive-Behavioral-Treatment-Borderline-Personality-Disorder/dp/0898621836/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1408057792&sr=8-2&keywords=cognitive+behavioral+therapy+for+bpd
&
http://www.amazon.com/Doing-Dialectical-Behavior-Therapy-Individualized/dp/1462502326/ref=sr_1_sc_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1408057888&sr=8-1-spell&keywords=doing+dialectical+behavioural+therapy
to get a better understanding of BPD and DBT. and right now I am working with these workbooks:
http://www.amazon.com/Training-Treating-Borderline-Personality-Disorder/dp/0898620341/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1408057792&sr=8-3&keywords=cognitive+behavioral+therapy+for+bpd
and
http://www.amazon.com/Expanded-Dialectical-Behavior-Therapy-Training/dp/1936128128/ref=pd_sim_b_6?ie=UTF8&refRID=1H69WV6FGR18FCSQ5TSQ
and I have just ordered this one.
http://www.amazon.com/Dialectical-Behavior-Therapy-Skills-Workbook/dp/1572245131/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1408057792&sr=8-1&keywords=cognitive+behavioral+therapy+for+bpd
the Acceptance and Commitment Therapy book I got is (I have yet to start this one):
http://www.amazon.com/Acceptance-Commitment-Therapy-Second-Practice/dp/1609189620/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1408058093&sr=1-1&keywords=acceptance+and+commitment+therapy
I do what is on the workbooks and I also do further research on the skills online so I can understand it better and see what works and what doesn't for me and I test them out forcing myself to do exposure sessions ( or try to get used to using them in the moment they are needed or helpful) and I write down everything so I don't forget and kind of monitor myself and my progress.
Don't choose a side. If you say to yourself "I am an X" your brain will find itself completely compelled to irrationally defend X, wasting precious brain cycles that could be better spent on other things.
Read a book on moral psychology if you want to give up political tribalism. Here are some suggestions:
http://www.amazon.com/The-Righteous-Mind-Politics-Religion/dp/0307377903
http://www.amazon.com/Moral-Tribes-Emotion-Reason-Between/dp/1594202605
Check out The Political Brain; it talks about the role of human emotion in decision in politics. Pretty interesting stuff, you may find it relevant in your course of studies.
Best of luck!
Bottom line is that we need to address the corruption in politics. Right now, it's basically unlimited spending with little to no accountability. Best and most TV ads win the day.
What they do in some countries is let every candidate have the same amount of TV advertising. Takes a lot of the money influence out of it.
If you don't believe me about the overwhelming role TV advertising can have in deciding elections you can read this book...
http://www.amazon.com/Political-Brain-Emotion-Deciding-Nation/dp/1586484257
Notice that most of the examples in it are TV ads.
And this doctor is partly right, but again it's so complex that I don't have the time to get into it. The short version is there are so many different types of depression and different causes that medicine doesn't really differentiate against so when they run trials they're really testing like 8 different types of depression without realizing since they lump them all together. Depression can be associated with serotonin which causes low self esteem type thinking, dopamine with equates to a lack of motivation, endorphin which affects your perception of pain, oxytocin which is like heartbreak and social ostracization, or GABA which is basically anxiety.... if you don't distinguish between which TYPE of depression it is, then you run a trial on a serotonin reuptakke inhibitor, then it's only going to work for the people who have serotonin related depression, and it's not going to even work for ALL of them. That's why a lot of trials look like they're not much better than placebo.
The bottom line is that YES antidepressants do suck, but the chemical imbalance model is absolutely absolutely absolutely grounded in empirical fact. Again, read either Julia Ross's work or Loretta Breuning's work. They're two of the leading experts in the area.
http://www.amazon.com/Meet-Your-Happy-Chemicals-Endorphin/dp/1463790929
https://www.amazon.com/Mood-Cure-4-Step-Program-Emotions-Today-ebook/dp/B000QCTPP8?ie=UTF8&ref_=cm_sw_su_dp
Try out cognitive behavior therpy.
This book is about it: http://www.amazon.com/Mastering-Your-Adult-ADHD-Cognitive-Behavioral/dp/0195188195/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1325185928&sr=8-2
Further reading for the interested:
Donald Nathanson - Shame and Pride: Affect, Sex and the Birth of the Self
(http://www.amazon.com/Shame-Pride-Affect-Birth-Self/dp/0393311090)
Paul Ekman - Emotions Revealed
(http://www.amazon.com/Emotions-Revealed-Second-Recognizing-Communication/dp/0805083391/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1309779886&sr=1-1)
Peter Fonagy et al - Affect Regulation, Mentalization and the Development of the Self
(http://www.amazon.com/Affect-Regulation-Mentalization-Development-Self/dp/1590511611/ref=sr_1_3?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1309779915&sr=1-3)