Ephemerides forum

User info

Welcome, Guest! Please login or register.


You are here » Ephemerides forum » Psychological aspects of astrology » Measure intervention


Measure intervention

Posts 1 to 20 of 30

1

All Hi! Astrology work - this work with humans not in a lesser extent, than work with by your horoscope and practice constantly puts new problems. Me long suffer question: How need to intervene in life closehuman? Exactly, in than the crux of the affairs. There is I have very the good girlfriend, an interesting, deep man (write here with its prior knowledge),, too, interested in involution (, unique and stuff. And asked she as something watch its horoscope. And here is that there is obtained: There two zone, one "the bad" (oao-squaring), one - "good", a strong, a powerful trigon, on which she successfully – is underway. Have become we to discuss oao with utterly killed tend, which affects its family life. She says: "And me not need to family and husband. I two times was married, has given birth to child, was raised by my his. I fulfilled its biosotsialnuyu program. Me not need to. "I say:" There is no, this not the. Here is if would oao-squaring "being ripe", prorabotalsya, if would you has become happy nowadays with men and then refused would from devices personal life, then this was would consciouschoice. And so this unconscious devastating programs, which lurk for accurate. Parties’smart words. In general, this not work with karma, and provalivanie in it. "

In a result we so and not understood each other, unfortunately. Attention, question. Me to leave human in alone or continue to starts to on brains? Will repeat, that man me close, me not would still as incapable its life. And then such the situation can description in fate anyone anywhere: With own husband, child, mother, friend, brother. Need whether simply to inform human about his complex places in map or need his canvass?

Theme complex, a multi-prong, controversial. Hope, that with the help discuss open any new the brink of, which until not see nor I, nor she.

0

2

And that, man here wasn suffers from such a hischoice? ;)

0

3

Cranberry wrote:

A that, man here wasn suffers from such a his choice?

There is no, man not suffers. Even contrary, receives pleasure from life. But personally I quite not am sure, that this itschoice.

0

4

But personally I quite not am sure, that this itschoice

And whose then?))

0

5

No, man not suffers. Even contrary, receives pleasure from life. <...>Please, question. Me to leave human in alone or continue to starts to on brains?

:cool:

0

6

Cranberry wrote:

and whose then?))

Can be I on-gevaldl answer issue on question? :) Tanja, and you one is, that our actions (most) soznatelny? Or we always do informed choices? And not make whether for us his our installations, restrictions, childhood and not very trauma, unfavorable figures horoscope and camping on D.? Woman, with-traumatic, experience marriage (for example), not of poor in marriage nor happiness, nor (sorry) ass, is logical will dismiss further relations with men, well deliberately motivating this words "me this not need to", but on fact.

Cranberry wrote:

A that, man here wasn suffers from such a his choice?

As nor paradoxically, but medular syndrome I. Understandable, that in such a case s name subject on "Lena, this your problems", but. Still times Podcherknu: Have us have all there is close people. People, which us nebayduzhimi, which we love, well regarded, proud of it they and camping on D. Tanja, have you there is close people? That would you made in ??? case?

0

7

And installations, and restrictions, and negative experience, and a conscious, and unconsciousness - this increasingly puzzle parts of single whole under entitled “man ” (this people in this moment time). And choice makes this very a host“man ”, and in his choosing he can rely on any of these elements of, and not only on conscious their part of. And he has on this full right. Because what would part of nor was – this would still “I ” (part of me, part of myexperience, already an integrated in me and admits me precisely thus, not other). And, respecting the in nebezrazlichnom me man “human ”, I respectfully am and to his choice, and to his past experience, and to his zaskokam-cockroaches from, and to his borders, and to his given (which him for something need, times he to them has resorted), because all of this –“ His. ”
Recollect fairy tale “on-frog ”, where old man-man said Ivan“ Why you lyagushachyu skin has? Don’t you its donned, not you and sack the was!” That and here accurately so same – if in man something there is, means, for hispsychics in this momentthis for something need, and first specifically on brains, can be assimilate addition Ivan, which prematurely has lyagushachyu skin. and tsarina simply plainly, banned for far, far away land and look then its [Whistles]disappear).
In any man initially laid and drive to development, and need in love, and they so or otherwise will and men, itself a path, so better wait “three days ” - and man himself or her with themselves unnecessary and prevents him skins -. And until he in it, simply remains to accept this as ????, encourage their behavior (and not commanding personality and considerable strength conviction) moments exit from “animals ” (carefully, neatly and closely), and not hasten events. All the more that in life accented different periods - there is time to scatter stones, and there is time their to collect.

Simply let-man right to live their lives and whether near, if anything. - this response to question "that would you made in ??? case"

Last edited by Cranberry (Jun 30 2009 19:46:43)

0

8

Лен, я "вклинюсь" в обсуждение со своим видением.... :question:
И так, штрихи к зарисовке:

Радуга wrote:

И попросила она как-то посмотреть ее гороскоп.

Ага, посмотрели :)

Радуга wrote:

Стали мы обсуждать

и...сознательное встретилось с бессознательным :glasses:

Радуга wrote:

В результате мы так и не поняли друг друга, к сожалению.

"и каждый остался при своём мнении"
А вот теперь серьёзно :glasses:

Радуга wrote:

Мне оставить человека в покое или продолжать капать на мозги? Повторю, что человек мне близок, мне не все равно как складывается ее жизнь.

Да Лен, тут очень чувствуется ТВОЯ эмоциональная вовлечённость. Близкие отношения всегда вызывают бОльшую эмоциональную включенность, что не всегда есть «гуд». В такой ситуации увеличивается в раза вероятность «неверных» действий, в результате которых, может получиться «хотел как лучше, а получилось как всегда». Т.е. либо может произойти неосознанное «соскальзывание на  решение своих проблем, а не клиента т.е. в какой-то момент, нам кажется что для него будет лучше, если то-то и то-то и уж мы то точно знаем, что ему надо, как и можем ответить на все зачем и почему» в итоге его проблема не решается…(потому что у него её нет…для него она не созрела, он её не видит, не чувствует …), либо осложнение отношений с другом-клиентом, для которого твоё желание помочь будет расценено как давление…в этом случае происходит остывание отношений их замедление с возможным последующим разрывом (ну или если даже и сохранятся, то будет чувствоваться холодок).
Например когда я училась, нам чётко было «вложено в наше сознание», что родственники и друзья – это не наши клиенты…в лучшем случае, если мы видим, что у них ДЕЙСТВИТЕЛЬНО существуют проблемы…которые без посторонней помощи они решить не смогут, то можем найти человека (специалиста), которому мы доверяем…и «прорабатываем подводку» клиента (родственника, друга) к работе с этим спецом.
Это как в случае, когда родитель-врач пытается прооперировать своего ребёнка…(он эмоционально вклЮчен и риск повышается…)
Лен, тут палка о двух концах, что называется. Вот если бы к тебе, как к профессионалу-психологу обратились с такой проблемой, как бы ты отреагировала? Да скорее всего ты бы подошла к этому вопросу… как сторонний наблюдатель (хоть и включенный, присоединившийся, понимающий, Но…с меньшей долей эмоциональности, и с бОльшей рациональностью, ведь так?). И скорее всего ты бы оперировала так же как Cranberry… :question:

Радуга wrote:

Нужно ли просто проинформировать человека о его сложных местах в карте или нужно его убеждать?

Если чел не просит о помощи – твоё вторжение может негативно отразиться на тебе самой (ты перетянешь эту энергию на себя. Ты к этому готова?). Ты, в данном случае чувствуешь свою ответственность…что ты видишь…у тебя взгляд «на его проблему» под другим углом зрения и ты не можешь остаться в стороне. В данном случае, «капание на мозги» может привести к противоположному от ожидаемого результату (т.е. действие=противодействию). Ты, как человек, который чувствует, что не может остаться в стороне, можешь лишь показать подруге картинку...варианты…расширить взгляд… показать это под разными углами… Проинформировать. А выбор…останется за ней. И вот тут главное, не перейти черту «где заканчивается твоё и начинается её пространство».

Радуга wrote:

Меня давно мучает вопрос: насколько нужно вмешиваться в жизнь близкого человека?

На столько, на сколько ТЫ сама готова…Если ты вмешиваешься, без просьбы на то другого человека, значит это зачем-то нужно тебе самой. :)

0

9

Tanja, thank you for opinion. In general something I itself would so, perhaps, had to speculate not whether under influence of emotions.

0

10

Yes not for that. I understand, that want to see close people happy, only importantly here not mistake their misconception about happiness with its.

Here is, saying still has found, as times about measures intervention: (hence)

"It turns out helpful respectfully and carefully treated not only to wishes and needs partners, but and to their values and restrictions. This more helpful and ecological – as for relations, so and for “safeguard ” our same values and restrictions. The other man not owes know and satisfy all our needs and desires. And we not owe to do all this relative to him. But we not have rights upend, strain and devalue values another, either his restrictions.
Restrictions – this what he objectively not can precisely now.
Values – this the, that for him important, this those his personal elections, on which he has the right outside dependence from our with him relations. "

Last edited by Cranberry (Jun 30 2009 23:24:34)

0

11

Cranberry wrote:

importantly here not mistake their misconception about happiness with its.

Theoretically this all correctly. Virtually same. Not, ah and for example have human son-” and have him their views about happiness. In thiscase that to do?

0

12

Son-” and girlfriend, not bring go married, - this different and disparate between themselves things at very many parameters too. But even in this case I, charitably, strongly doubt, that if starts to on brains on subject "whom and as need to to live" son suddenly get your message navyazyvaemymi him the parent perceptions about happiness.

0

13

Cranberry wrote:

the Son-” and girlfriend, not bring go married, - this different and disparate between themselves things at very many parameters too.

The general one thing - this measure intervention.

Cranberry wrote:

But even in this case I, charitably, strongly doubt, that if starts to on brains on subject "whom and as need to to live" son suddenly get your message navyazyvaemymi him the parent perceptions about happiness.

I, too, doubt. In such a case, in my opinion, need to not talk to speak, and something to do very oppressive and radical. Or soft and radical. Or not soft. In short, something to do. , drug addiction - this very a strong involtatsiya and himself man there hardly already is participating clear conscience, there already conversation with ox need to start.

0

14

Радуга wrote:

the Common one thing - this measure intervention.

Measure intervention as times different will.
It is one thing, when somewhere there lives girlfriend, lives their lives, and with it not is fought nor joint farming, nor business, no other affairs, camping on E. Style its life raze directly not affects my interests. (Yes and at all, can whether whose something Family position their involve)
And another matter - a member of family, living under one with with other people. And here crops up already much more interactions. And material, and financial, and personality, and social. And all they reflected and affect interests other family members. And this gives the right assert them these the most their interests.
T. E. In the latter case intervention will, but not with positions "teach another correct life", and with positions settlement interests sides. And from outside nothing more in this situation do cannot be,, until man himself will not come toward solving, that him need as something to change his life, until he not will feel own skin, that without drugs him will better, than with them (and until him and so well).
Moreover ,-users become not in an instant and not on an empty place. And parent role here far not the latter. So that here work on all ?????.

0

15

Got interested in polemic and want say, that I supporter intervention. But want, that would me correctly understood. I never "- Put a drop on brains" close people. On my view, there are two basic way intervention in affairs people. The first - this the, that here is discussed, and the second - this personal example. This as in one famous history entitled "not palleggi sweet" (seems recognize with Mahatma Gandhi). One girl suffered Diabetes diabetes, on-this its mother turned with request to this’man, that would he, buoyed by their prestige, said being not there is sweet. Gandhi asked woman come through week. Then even through week, and then even „Briedisi. Finally through month girl uncharacteristic with Gandhi and he said: "Not palleggi sweet." Girl unsupportable there is sweet. Then woman asked: "Why same you immediately this not have made?." Gandhi responded question: "And know as it is difficult to abandon sweet?"
Moral such is: That would affect another person, need very be example moreover, that like it or offer.

0

16

Юра wrote:

that would affect another person, need very be example moreover, that like it or offer.

I agree with with the thought your, Yura. But here is on practice as something differently is obtained. Have us in family not smoke nor I, nor husband. But little daughter our 18-year-old smoking a butt somewhere with year ago. I was been shaken these. No amount talk not help. She not wants nothing to hear. And me my colleague told, that it had flip history. Smokes she, but nor daughter, nor son, looking on mother again, this disastrous habit not acquired. Thinner all here, harder.

0

17

Cranberry wrote:

yes and at all, can whether whose something Family position their involve

Not Family position! And attitude to itself through Family position. Very many, of poor any fail in a certain sphere, seek compensationin the other sphere, forgetting, that deceive nature of impossible. She would still punish.

Cranberry wrote:

style its life raze directly not affects my interests

And on-my this already not each, times his style life not affects your interests. And let us divide the next things: Communication social "masks" and the heart, soul of.

Cranberry wrote:

strongly doubt, that if starts to on brains on subject "whom and as need to to live" son suddenly get your message navyazyvaemymi him the parent perceptions about happiness.

Well. And that to do?

Cranberry wrote:

until man himself will not come toward solving, that him need as something to change its spite of never going

As something all of this correctly, prichesano. And if NOT will come? I would, for example, called in all bells, and spat me was would on personal borders.

Юра wrote:

I never "- Put a drop on brains" close people

Yura, and that you way in the notion of "starts to on brains"? I had in mind: "Canvass."

Юра wrote:

Moral such is: That would affect another person, need very be example moreover, that like it or offer.

Here it is difficult not agree. If to talk about this, exemplified case, then I made several neat Hits In made, to although would awaken she has interest to phenolic. We're experimenting with cream for faces and with spark of for lips and man said: "Me it is no fun, me this not need to." I recover in the house, respecting the as times this right on choice, although and with a sense of deep regrettable. I, incidentally, itself very actively'm using all women’s pizzazling and love this fervently, until samozabvennosti.

Incidentally, in subject (from an online journal):

Help, me very painful for and frightening!
I very love one person.
He hard ill (each stage is in of TermWare stage, if this is important) and, in my the deep their political leanings, not makes-tenth parts of moreover, that could ease his state of (he on turn on planes until now not embarked -- three years passed, as he took ill)
Moreover, we very different people. And then, have him in stated prior history of two marriage, one neudachnee another, and this too, know whether, places imprint in the form of different there worries and expectations.
Six months ago split up. Then again wrestle: I has achieved renewed relations, so as realized, that without him not can, simply'm pipped, and all. From this history has remained much pain and fear: And suddenly he again decides from me eliminate, then will be even most agonizingly. Meet very rarely.
Still much pain and fear -- from-for his disease, and because that I see, that much can and should be do -- and do nothing not can.
So ‘, that my psychologist -- the good the familiar his sister. Told it all of this. She me promised to talk to the with his the sister, think together, that can be done.
Literally through couple of days my a favorite under meeting very strictly asked me "refer entire this activities rescue his." Not cost even ask, where information and that for "activities."
Ah and that me now to do? "Refer this activities" and peacefully wait, until he themselves'd ruin terminally? Telling "a serious conversation"? Continue to quietly starts to on brains psikhologine and sister to -- risking, that not one, so another again leaks information in not very adequate form?
Help!

http://community.livejournal.com/gestal … 70478.html

Lud_mila wrote:

Wu us in family not smoke nor I, nor husband. But little daughter our 18-year-old smoking a butt somewhere with year ago.

There is opinion in psychology, that usually what something banned action parents pits this most action have children. Say, in our family smoking not simply not abetted, and was prohibited from. It was thought, that kuryaschmy man - this dishonest man, which cannot be trust and have any affairs. In a result smokes brother and in 27 years smoking a butt I :dontknow:

0

18

Радуга wrote:

There are opinion in psychology, that usually what something banned action parents pits this most action have children. Say, in our family smoking not simply not abetted, and was prohibited from. It was thought, that kuryaschmy man - this dishonest man, which cannot be trust and have any affairs. In a result smokes brother and in 27 years smoking a butt I

As this "California"? My vodoleyskaya nature such not understands.

0

19

Lud_mila wrote:

How this "California"? My vodoleyskaya nature such not understands.

Ah as explain? There is things, to which attitude neutral or formal. And there is things, on which in families there is taboos, ban, Association with them any something negative things, with they directly, are linked can and not be (as in case with smoking). I.e.’s irrational such a link: If you one takes this, then you bad. So here is, if parents implement a such taboos in families, i.e. much the likelihood, that children their exercising.

0

20

Радуга wrote:

And let us divide the next things: Communication social "masks" and the heart, soul of.

Yes, let us already divide:
- communication social “masks ” and projections, that any woman must unkind enjoy cosmetic properly and unkind be under return, and for lack inadequate to – fight and seek, find and not surrender,
- and communication the heart and soul of, when sometimes and without words case understandable, that interested in human on fact in this moment, and that there is no, on that he wants spend their forces and time, but on that there is no, where he “wants, but not can ” and him requires aid, and where he simply not wants, and banana for him this simply banana.

Радуга wrote:

Yes. And that to do?

You me this ask about? Excuse, but I have no son-a drug addict, nothing help not can.

Радуга wrote:

I would, for example, called in all bells, and spat me was would on personal borders.

And this already yours right, and your choice. There is desire to call – call. Observance of strangers borders utterly not denoting neglect own desires. All the more that until not you lay a hand to cause borders, as you's sounding, that you their violated?)) Just making choice, person should be ready bear for him responsibility and be ready obtain the answer and the result, far not an appropriate the pending. As man with advanced osoznannostyu, think, that accepting such responsibility for you not will total big problems. :yep:

0


You are here » Ephemerides forum » Psychological aspects of astrology » Measure intervention