responsibility follow-up
Peter Parkinson
peterpi at xtra.co.nz
Mon May 19 22:17:56 CDT 2008
Hi Adam
I see psychodrama as a very powerful process. When I was learning I heard
some say that psychodrama is an inherently safe method. Thankfully I was
practicing psychodrama as part of a general medical practice in a small
community. I say thankfully because I got immediate feedback of both the
benefits and the adverse happenings that could be attributed to the
interventions that I was making I peoples¹ lives. Had clientele simple left
and not given me feedback then I would be continuing to make the same errors
now. And perhaps I still am in some ways and not even knowing it, but I do
know that I have suffered, and enjoyed, an endless series of learning curves
and this is thanks to wanting the feedback and for accepting my own
responsibility where that was appropriate. Hitler, Bush and the Burmese
Junta I am sure all see themselves as creative genius¹s and can only
maintain this self opinion so long as they isolate themselves from consumer
feedback. The creative genius and the ultruistic well wisher do need
feedback and to be responsible for both the benefits and the shortfalls work
done.
I experience goose-bumps of dread when I see any suggestion of the
abnegation of personal responsibility, and when we are practicing
psychodrama I maintain that we must stay in touch with the work that we do.
To this end I applaud Kate Hudgkins in the in the attention to details of
safety that the Spiral displays.
Does this explain what I mean?
Thanks for asking for clarification
Peter P
On 20/05/08 8:44 AM, "Adam Blatner" <ablatner at verizon.net> wrote:
> Hi Peter. Alas, like the other Peter's humor, I don't get your meaning. What
> are you suggesting?
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>>
>> From: Peter Parkinson <mailto:peterpi at xtra.co.nz>
>>
>> To: Peter Howie <mailto:peterhowie at macquariehouse.com.au> ; Group Talk
>> <mailto:list at grouptalkweb.org>
>>
>> Sent: Monday, May 19, 2008 2:46 PM
>>
>> Subject: Re: responsibility follow-up
>>
>>
>> Adolf Hitler, George Bush and the Generals of Burma are not responsible for
>> follow up. Shall we join the bunch?
>>
>> Peter P
>>
>> Aoteoraoa New Zealand
>>
>>
>> On 19/05/08 10:44 PM, "Peter Howie" <peterhowie at macquariehouse..com.au>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Dear Adam,
>>>
>>> Beware of the following Australian humour.
>>>
>>> You are entirely right Adam in proposing that we remain rational and
>>> thoughtful and reasonable in the realm of responsibility. Heck we could
>>> even invoke the Covey principle of circle of concern and circle of
>>> influence.
>>>
>>> Humour finished, I couldn't keep going with it. I am warmed up however to
>>> the idea that words can inspire and it is rarely the mundane words that
>>> inspire but rather the impossible, the unlikely and the unreasonable -
>>> somewhat akin to noble but not quite so much. I do recall Moreno saying he
>>> was being unreasonable. But then again he expressed the thought that a
>>> purposeless world was unreasonable also. I haven't yet worked out the
>>> responsibility for the whole Universe from Moreno's point of view - that is
>>> way out there. However I can follow a religious way to get there - my
>>> spirit is one with the spirit of the universe and at some deep fundamental
>>> level I am connected with the creativity of the universe etc etc. But what
>>> I really liked was Moreno's assertion that I was responsible for everyone
>>> and everyone was responsible for me. Now that is a revolutionary doctrine.
>>> There ain't no religious mob that I have come across that would assert
>>> anything close to that. The nature of that reciprocal responsibility is
>>> both impossible to me and desirable to me. And at the same time it so out
>>> of reach.
>>>
>>> Cheers again
>>>
>>> Peter in Brisbane
>>>
>>> At 08:34 PM 5/18/2008 -0500, Adam Blatner wrote:
>>>
>>>> Thinking about this:
>>>> 1. Moreno's claim we're responsible for the whole universe.
>>>> 2. Peter's observation May 05: I was in a Non Violent Communication
>>>> (NVC) workshop yesterday - and they have the opposite belief - that each
>>>> person has absolutely no responsibility for anyone else - though I didn't
>>>> go deep enough to see whether this is an assertion that they want people
>>>> to take up or whether they actually believe it. It leads to a certain type
>>>> of intimacy and a certain type of isolation which I found anti-Morenian.
>>>> However interesting ways of using language were presented - and of course
>>>> they stopped at empathy rather than role reversal. But you can see, Adam,
>>>> where Moreno's dictum, wonderfully overblown as it is - is a powerful
>>>> antidote/contrary idea to that one.
>>>> Adam: This contrary assertion throws into contrast the ideal of
>>>> responsibility and reveals its problem:
>>>> There is a desire or willingness to participate in addressing this or
>>>> that problem---and communicating and following up on that desire.
>>>> There is a recognition of non-control, and an associate recognition
>>>> that one can not be "fully" responsible for that which is not fully in his
>>>> or her control.
>>>> So responsibility isn't something can be done "fully."
>>>>
>>>> Rather, it is also a responsibility to recognize limitations of what
>>>> can be and/or should even be attempted to be controlled.
>>>> And sometimes the kindest, most politically wise thing to
>>>> recognize that one should not try to force, explain interminably, hector,
>>>> coerce, lecture, and in other ways try to get one's way in all cases.
>>>> (Much less declare war.)
>>>>
>>>> Interesting point, addressing as I also do the seductiveness of
>>>> seemingly noble words.
>>>>
>>>> Warmly, Adam
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Grouptalk mailing list
>>> List at grouptalkweb.org
>>> http://grouptalkweb.org/mailman/listinfo/list_grouptalkweb.org
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Grouptalk mailing list
>>> List at grouptalkweb.org
>>> http://grouptalkweb.org/mailman/listinfo/list_grouptalkweb.org
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>>> Checked by AVG.
>>> Version: 8.0.100 / Virus Database: 269.23.21/1454 - Release Date: 5/19/2008
>>> 7:44 AM
>>>
>>>
>>> Grouptalk mailing list
>>> List at grouptalkweb.org
>>> http://grouptalkweb.org/mailman/listinfo/list_grouptalkweb.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://grouptalkweb.org/pipermail/list_grouptalkweb.org/attachments/20080520/bd0b4342/attachment.html
More information about the List
mailing list