Page 1 of 1

tv addiction

Posted: Fri Sep 06, 2002 11:21 am
by Joy Lucas
An interesting topic - apart from the programme content, lure of the
adverts, hypnotic quality of noise and sounds, colours and abstraction of
images, emission of gases etc, one might also consider the electricity
involved - ELECTRICITAS makes for very interesting reading and the links
with other remedies such as the Magnets and Galvanismus enhances our
knowledge of a powerful group of remedies.

Best wishes, Joy Lucas
_________________________________________________________________
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx

Re: tv addiction

Posted: Fri Sep 06, 2002 2:07 pm
by Shannon Nelson
For many years I would promptly leave the room if someone turned on the TV
-- because I'd seen too many times that once I looked at it, I was hooked on
it! Would watch for literally hours, with one foot literally out the door
because I'd had other plans. I was far enough from the set that electrity
would not have been a factor; plus, I've never gotten addicted to light
bulbs or radio!

My son is like this too--once he starts watching -- anything!!!! -- he'll
watch until *forced* to stop, and if I don't force soon enough (should be
less than one hour), he goes into horrible "withdrawal"--nasty mood,
contankerous, nasty, all over the map...

I also have wondered how to use that in repping, but haven't figured
anything out. Maybe "desire to be magnetized" (speaking of rubrics I've
never understood), or problems with will, or boundaries, or ???

Shannon
on 9/6/02 4:21 AM, Joy Lucas at joylucas_speaktv@hotmail.com wrote:

Re: tv addiction

Posted: Fri Sep 06, 2002 9:52 pm
by Wendy Howard
Hi Shannon
You said it!! Your being mesmerised by the TV may well relate to a
susceptibility to magnetism. There are some pretty powerful magnets in TV
screens, after all! (BTW I can relate to this one - it gets me that way too
sometimes.)

Mesmerism is, however, not the same as addiction. Do you or your son ever
miss the TV if there's not one around? Do you ever find yourself craving for
a daily dose?

Regards
Wendy

Re: tv addiction

Posted: Sat Sep 07, 2002 11:43 pm
by Shannon Nelson
Hi Wendy,

*I* certainly don't crave it; I broke my "addiction" (or whatever) by
ten-plus years of not being around the thing! And now I'm too busy to
devote enough time to renew it (ha-ha), and I've such a bad attitude toward
it!

My son, tho, is absolutely lost without something that plugs in and glows --
tv, computer, GameBoy, PlayBox... I try to limit him very strictly (for
many, many reasons), but lately it's really, really hard, because he seems
so *utterly* at a loss. One-on-one attention of a friend will also serve
(usually), but even with lots of that, the moment the "party" stops (he's 7,
so I don't mean a literal party), or the moment he's too tired to keep
playing, he starts again, begging for computer or TV. (He'll also settle
for being read to, and there is some similarity there!)

I'm not sure how much is that he craves the thing, and how much is that he
hasn't acquired the other skills that he ought to (which I would blame very
directly on over-access to the stupid tube) -- reading is still hard (and he
doesn't like it much); he hates drawing (and is not good at it), thinks
marbles are "stupid", jacks are too hard, he gives up almost immediately in
screaming frustration. He's not good at playing by himself -- and that's
sad, because earlier on he had *such* a lively imagination. But where has it
gone...

Maybe instead of the "drug" analogy, I should think about "junk food for
the mind" -- doesn't give you much (she said cynically), but at least it's
easy, argh...

Re the magnets, tho, I don't think that's it... I was too far away to be
affected by magnets, and they would have the same effect (wouldn't they?)
whether set is off or on... To me it seems more a matter of stimulation
that's so effortless, passive entertainment. Dunno... I'm very interested
in all this input, tho!

Oh, and his cousin was (probably is, but we're not in touch now) just the
same, only more so. At age 12, a *complete* tube junky, and when (he lived
with us for a while) I said "No TV" (for a while), he was so confused,
bereft, at-a-loss, almost literally walking in circles for lack of any faint
idea of anything else to do (and BTW this was not about being in an
unfamiliar environment or anything). Med was a terrific rx for him, and
also a biggie for my son previously, but perhaps that's coincidence? I do
feel there's some connection in this that I'm not making. I think TV is a
genuinely troublesome thing, that it can cause lots of problems for lots of
kids, but also there's obviously a *big* factor of more/less
susceptibility...

I was interested to hear that the Waldorf Schools (Rudolph Steiner's baby)
won't accept a child who's been watching more than I think it's 5 hours of
TV per week, because they find that any more than that makes the child
somehow unfit for their program; I assume that would have to do with too
much need of "instant gratification", too little patience, and things of
that nature, but I'm only guessing.

Shannon
on 9/6/02 2:44 PM, Wendy Howard at wendy@rachan.worldonline.co.uk wrote:

Re: tv addiction

Posted: Sun Sep 08, 2002 9:47 pm
by isali ben-jacob
good day shannon. Most fundamentally we physicians attempt to
interpret the pattern of our observations. The actor exercises some
aspects of a mental process, with analytical precision or otherwise,
the results of which we observe. Is the actor able to express 'free
will' or are they 'predetermined' to express themselves as we
observe?

We are trained in homeopathy and oriental medicine that all stress
factors act on the vital force (chi), and that we observe or the pt.
experiences the 'reaction' or 'response' of the vital force (chi).
The relationship between the stress factors and the vital force is
of a mutually interdependent nature. Please note that I am with
intention not using the phrase pathogenic factors. Stress factors
is a component to the existence of the life force. It remains
valueless, not pathogenic nor antipathogenic. It becomes a stimulus
within a social context.

So your child reflects a behavior, and likely other symptoms, that
is a 'response' to the stress factors which are acting on his vital
force. If control was possible, it would suggest an imposition of
wilful intention and in an extreme potentially overriding one's
constitution and/or miasms. Parenthetically control is contra to
all training of hypnotism, namely that one cannot be made to violate
one's so-called moral attitudes. One's constitution evolves from
your miasmatic foundation. In oriental medicine we refer to this as
the 'source chi', yuan chi. One's constitution becomes the garb
clothing your miasms. Therefore my conclusion is that there is no
such thing as control; that it is an illusion; that the issue is
always one of management of the social conditions in which one finds
oneself.

The allopathic paradigm infers control as there is no context for
what is observed. There is the assertion that through medicine or
surgery control of the pattern may be achieved. Our paradigms are
based on principles which offer interpretations of 'how' not 'why'
things occur as they do. Control would find ready association with
'why'.

Both the observer and the actor are in a soup of social stimulus.
And the dynamics, the action component of this soup is 'time'. Time
is the promotional element to the social stimulus. And the social
stimulus is the element which protects time. They are servants to
one another. It is not a question of control. It is a reflection
of management, an intertwined reflection of social stimulus and time
aspects (see below). And this mix offers a qualitative description
of 'how' things occur as they do. We observe what has occurred or
what is occurring to another whose vital force is 'reacting' to the
stress factors on their path of life.

You have described the reaction which both you and your child have
to a common stimulus. Further you have offered a distinction in how
each of you currently differ in your response. Were control real
you would not have one foot 'in the door' or out the door, and your
child would accept w/o issue a change in the environment. So
something else is occurring of an energetic nature which is not
quantifiable.

My assessment and I believe our mutual training yields our
application of principles, whether as actor or observer, with a
yin/yang relationship between a miasmatic constitutional vital force
and stress factors. And that they are intertwined in an inter
consuming, inter transforming, mutually interdependent relationship.

My description below is intended to demonstrate that an actor
exercises an expression of 'acceptance or rejection' to any and all
stress factors; that this is an expression of selection which flows
from one's miasmatically influenced constitution and; that the
fluidity of the process unfolds with one of three aspects of time.

The level of agitation which you describe your child having is
suggestive of a disturbance within the linear time aspects (see
below). That component of function which requires crisp linear
processing of information is disturbed. That component which you
describe that offers 'sedation' to the agitated state is imagination
time. The depth of somatic disturbance is evaluated by reviewing
the whole picture, the pattern of social stimulus responses. In
oriental medicine it would be the overlay of the extraordinary
vessel system with the regular channel system. I mention this
parenthetically and won't elaborate here.

And so it is not a question of control, rather of management. The
ability to select of the myriad of alternatives offered at any
instant one that portends good health as a consequence. And as Dr.
Little commented in an earlier posting that health is a relative
circumstance as stress factors are inherent in life's manifestation.
Hi Isali,

(Sorry for my slow response) I'm afraid you've completely lost me.
How
does this explain or relate to the TV experience? It seems to me
that the
TV junkie is failing to make each level of decision making, and
that's what
interests me. But what was your thought?

Shannon
on 9/6/02 9:19 AM, isali ben-jacob at isali@bellsouth.net wrote:

an
accepting or
overlaying this is
its review
reject it out of
assessment must be
the decision
transform it to
levels is
imagination time;
variance
Linear time
sensorial
circumstance which
experience
when standing
defy
on the TV
was hooked on
out the door
electrity
to light
-- he'll
(should be
mood,
figured
rubrics I've