Mental Illness?

 

There is no such a thing as mental illness. Due to our unintelligent, mechanical, unconscious, unaddressed, involuntary, careless involvement in Disembodied Language (DL), we speak about certain behaviors as mental illness, addiction or criminal, but these categories aren’t helpful, as we are simply referring to negative behaviors, which need to be reduced or, ideally, stopped.

 

It is common, in communistic countries, such as China or Russia, to consider anyone mentally ill, who opposes the propaganda of the oppressive regime. Although – because we all unknowingly engage in DL – it may not be so obvious, a very similar thing is happening in Western psychiatry or psychology, where everyone still believes in the myth of a chemical imbalance in the brain, which can be remediated with medications. The pharmaceutical lobby is as authoritarian as any autocratic government and only someone, who has ongoing Embodied Language (EL), knows what an insidious crime is being committed.

 

The term Anti-Psychiatry (AP) is more relevant than ever, because, nobody has been willing to acknowledge the difference between DL and EL and, consequently, everything we claim to know about human behavior is grounded in our inability to stop our own stupid, insensitive DL. Only EL can be in favor of AP, as it debunks the false notion, that there is language inside of us (please, also read my other writings or listen to my two You Tube channels, Maximus Peperkamp or maximuspeperkamp-hw8sw).

 

The big problem with the construct of mental illness, isn’t necessarily, that it is falsely based on a medical model or on a disease model, but that there exists no such a process as what we call our mind or thoughts. What we consider to be mental, is as much a fantasy, as psychosis or dreams, but it is only once we are able to have EL instead of DL, that we can acknowledge this.

 

If we are ever going to fully explore and understand the great difference between DL and EL, this is not going to come about, due to another, idiotic, convoluted, contentious debate, about whether to fix or completely overthrow the way in which we talk about and then, supposedly, treat, this fabricated, so-called mental illness. To be able to have EL, we must end DL and all the lies we were told with it. Psychologists, psychiatrists or therapists, will be shocked once they have EL.

 

I have a Master of Arts and a Master of Science in Clinical Psychology and almost achieved my PhD. I withdrew, because I felt betrayed by Palo Alto University, who, initially, promised, I would be able to choose my own research topic for my dissertation, but forced me, to follow along the boring research of some arrogant supervisor. I should have achieved my Ph.D. for my discovery of the DL/EL distinction, but nobody there had the integrity or the courage, to let me reveal, what is going to be the future of psychology. EL is the future, but not DL, which is accepted as normal, because people are ignorant about EL.

 

From my perspective – with ongoing EL – I want to make it unequivocally clear, that it is a crime, psychiatrists push medications on people, who have lived through challenging circumstances. Everything looks different with EL and there is potential for recovery, once our DL is stopped by us and not by someone else. Once we know the difference between our DL and EL, we want to stop our DL and go on with EL. I have studied psychology for many years. I have worked in this dysfunctional, useless, undermining and pretentious field of mental health for many years, as 1) a mental health worker, 2) crisis counselor, 3) group-home worker, 4) therapist. I have taught psychology classes, as an instructor at Butte College for many years. Anyone who reads this, should know psychology or psychiatry is a hoax.

 

Nobody recovers. Nobody gets back on their feet. People are indoctrinated and medicated, while society is wasting millions of dollars for programs, which absolutely do not work, and nobody is really checking for results. Likewise, getting people of the street and giving them homes, is supporting dependent behavior, which makes people even more demanding, than they were before. I have seen problems only getting bigger and more complicated and I claim that this is all the result of our refusal to acknowledge the difference between DL and EL.

 

Anyone with any honesty, who witnessed how many troubled people go, in vain, through this sordid, mental-health-revolving-door – which, no matter how you put it, is good for business – must admit, that things are only getting worse. There is no reason to idealistically believe that anyone is going to get better. To the contrary, the mental health business keeps on expanding, to serve more and more people, while nobody addresses, the illusion of inner language.

 

I am no longer working in the field to which I dedicated my life. I am now retired, and I am so glad, I didn’t become just another psychologist. In this writing, I let readers know, mental illness is one of the many fabrications of DL. I say on my own authority, DL, our usual way of talking, is dissociative in nature. All our problems result from our habitual, unquestioned participation in DL. A society that brands people as mentally ill, is a society in decline. Likewise, a society, who accepts as normal – do you not see these gallons of cheap whisky, or vodka at the local supermarket? Only for alcoholics! – that people may get addicted to drugs and alcohol; steal or may commit all sorts of crimes, without any consequences; scream antisemitic hatred, on university campuses, in the name of freedom of speech; or live filthy lives, in tents, trash parks,  public spaces and shit and piss on the streets; such a society is doomed, as its citizens don’t want to accept, that they have let this happen.

 

Nobody can ever accuse me, that I have never been exposed to psychotic, manic, depressed, delusional or suicidal people. I have noticed, how each of the people, who I have met, have always positively responded to my EL. The proof of EL was always in the pudding and the reason I write this, is because nothing has ever made me doubt about the validity and necessity of EL. Moreover, it has always been the professionals themselves, who didn’t want to believe me and interact to verify the difference between their own DL and EL. Mental illness is as much a myth today, as it was when, in 1961, the psychiatrist Thomas Szazs stated, the irrefutable fact, there is no medical basis for so-called mental illness. Szasz supposedly alienated himself from his field, but I say, he was 100% correct. To this day, nobody in the field has the guts to say it, as it would still get them 'alienated'.   

 

In closing, EL is not some therapeutic technique or some tool in your toolbox. EL is only going to happen for those who learn how to have it. I am convinced, anyone, who can talk and listen can engage in EL. You have already done it, but not consciously, deliberately, skillfully and most importantly, continuously. Your problems don’t prevent you from talking out loud with yourself and listening to yourself while you speak. You don’t do this, when you engage in DL, but you only do this when you engage in EL. You know when this is the case, as you suddenly feel, your problems seem to melt, like snow in the sun.  

 Oppressed,

 

In today’s divisive, political, separate universe, people, in Western-Democratic-Judeo-Christian societies are either classified as colonizers or colonized or as oppressor and oppressed. What nobody is paying attention to, however, is that there is a great difference between Embodied Language (EL) and Disembodied Language (DL) and that all politics – yes, all politics – is DL.

 

To be clear, in DL, speakers, who do not listen to themselves, actively, deliberately, coercively, yet unconsciously, dominate, manipulate or exploit the listener or the audience. In EL, on the other hand, speakers hear themselves, which means, they are their own listener. Consequently, EL speakers treat those who listen, like they treat themselves, that is, they are in touch with their audience. That connection is felt and continued,  because in EL, listeners can, at any given time, without any predetermined rule, become speakers and speakers can become listeners. In other words, in EL, communicators experience, for the first time, truly the freedom of speech.

 

Obviously, in DL, there is always an oppressor and someone else, who is feeling oppressed. And, the attention-demanding, intimidating, forceful DL-speaker, is always imposing him or herself on his or her audience. Therefore, the DL speaker – who is, supposedly, in charge of the so-called conversation, who determines what we talk about, who may say something, when and for how long – is the colonizer and those, who don’t have any power or ability to change the conversation, they are, of course, the colonized. However, regardless of whether one is colonizer or colonized, whether one is the oppressor or the oppressed, everyone is in support of DL. Nobody, who views themselves and each other with colored glasses of colonizer vs colonized or oppressor vs oppressed, will be able to have EL, in which these categories have lost their meaning. Only during EL there can be equality, but the frustrated people, who scream about equality, have yet to acknowledge this.

 

Only when we are going to have EL, instead of DL, with each other, will there be a permanent end to oppression, which was normalized due to our usual way of talking, in which everyone is fighting with each other, to get the attention. Since the beginning of time, different groups of human beings have engaged in DL – which was never properly addressed with EL – and, thus, we have, basically, verbally, always been at war with each other and, of course, with ourselves.

 

It is meaningless, deceitful and gas-lighting, to say – with DL – we stand unequivocally against hatred, on the basis of religion, ethnicity, race, national origin or other categories, as long as these so-called other categories don’t include the DL/EL distinction. Once we know about the immensely important difference between our DL and our EL, we are all on the same page, as we will all be against DL, but in favor of our EL.

 

The big unaddressed problem with Freedom of Speech, as mentioned in the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, is precisely this latitude for the expression of controversial and even offensive views. In EL, we never say anything offensive, hostile, uncomfortable or even controversial to each other. The reason this is so hard to believe, is because we have never had any deliberate, ongoing EL. The justification, that if we don’t put up with it (with DL), we would chill the freedom of thought or ideas, is, of course, actually a direct endorsement of DL.  

 

Any so-called intolerance of ideas, is always an indication of DL and our increasingly polarized societies, are the outcome of our unconscious participation in our, in violence escalating, DL. It is astonishing, that no scholars, no scientists, no freedom-loving individuals, have so far had the courage, to openly recognize the validity of the DL/EL distinction. And, this imaginary freedom of thought is of no importance, because we need to be able to say it, to hear it and to write it, to read it. Moreover, there is no inner language.

 

In DL, we can never say what we really want to say. In other words, in DL, we, unknowingly, oppress ourselves. Moreover, to escape from this horrible, miserable, embarrassing reality, we seek to oppress others, even if it is with victimhood. Also, in DL, there are many experiences to which we have no access, because our DL doesn’t allow us to get in touch with our true feelings. Our EL isn’t sentimental, idealistic or romantic, but it deals with what we truly feel. Due to our history of conditioning with DL, we have become dissociated from many of our own most intimate experiences. In effect, we have many no-go-zones. With DL, we have become our own worst enemies, as we keep ourselves endlessly pre-occupied with all sorts of distractive nonsense, so that we don’t feel what we feel, let alone say it to ourselves, and listen to it, as we would do during our ongoing EL.        

Transhuman?

 

What makes a boy want to be a girl and what makes a girl want to be a boy? Let’s talk about adults too. What makes a man want to be a woman and what makes a woman want to be man? Have you seen any movies lately? Most likely, you have seen adults, men and women, but also boys and girls, do all kinds of incredible stuff, which men, women, boys or girls can’t do. Why do audiences want to be entertained, by these childish fantasies, that they can fly, travel in time, perform magic or have super-powers?

 

Oh, yes, I get it, we want to get the attention of others, we want to be loved, accepted, adored, honored, respected, feared or avenged. Sadly, we will, unconsciously, demand all this, as long as we aren’t able to give to ourselves – with our Embodied Language (EL) – what we couldn’t receive from others, who mainly engaged in Disembodied Language (DL), because they simply didn’t know, how to have ongoing EL.

 

Did you know, there is a school of philosophy that is called transhumanism? They advocate the enhancement of the human condition by developing and making widely available sophisticated technologies that can greatly enhance longevity, cognition, and wellbeing. Are you having already a chip implanted in your brain? It is going to happen, if you let it happen.

 

These lofty transhumanists actually study the potential benefits and dangers of emerging technologies, that could overcome fundamental human limitations, as well as the ethics of using such technologies. Sounds familiar? They even believe human beings may eventually be able to transform themselves into ‘special’ beings with abilities so greatly expanded from the current undesirable condition as to merit the label posthuman beings. Well, I guess, it hasn’t really worked out as their proponents intended.

 

We all walk or sit around with our I-Phones and if you work out, at the gym, everyone wears ear plugs, to have some aural stimulation, as our DL apparently doesn’t do much for us. In fact, we need something stronger all the time, as we have become habituated to all sorts of noises and disturbances. And, have you not noticed, people driving by in cars, in which they play the music so loud, that the entire building shakes? How about the loud noises made by cars, boats or yet-skies? Why does the whole neighborhood need to hear, that you get in or out of your car? I get it, you are important. I hear and see you.

 

Why do women have plastic, claw-like nails and why do so many show off their butts, tits and, even their pussy? What’s the deal with all these tattoos, these green and blue hairstyles, these piercings and these plastic surgeries? Oh, I see, you are beautiful, awesome, wonderful. Did it make you feel any better? It doesn’t look like it.

 

Since time immemorial, out of fear of their own death, people have been in search immortality. Supposedly, you will achieve eternal youth, if you first find, then, drink (yak!) or bathe in the mythical spring called the Fountain of Youth. Ridiculous tales of such a magical fountain have been told around the world for thousands of years. Many springs are considered sacred, due to the presumed restorative powers of water. In the Middle Ages, there was this story about the elixir of life, a potion that grants the drinker eternal life and cures all diseases. Every culture has its own version of some powerful medicine, which, basically, cures everything that is wrong.

 

Once one recognizes the difference between DL and EL and one is able to go on with one’s own EL, these supposedly empowering potions are as irrelevant, as prayers, mantras or other spiritual, mystical formulas or magic voodoo spells. Nothing compares to the wholesome effects of one’s own ongoing EL, which puts an end to all the superstition, mediated by our DL.

 

It should come as no surprise, the set of beliefs and practices that aims to ‘improve’ the genetic quality of the human population, better known as eugenics, was considered – and, as we can all see, still is today – the medical path to creating and facilitating the so-called transhuman. The wish, to change all of humanity, is always a sign of one’s own inability to change oneself. With DL, one seeks to acquire power, to dominate, change and subdue others. In EL, such stupid, destructive activity is out of the question.

 

There have been many different schools of philosophy, psychology or reality, but none of them have addressed the difference between DL and EL. Actually, they have all inadvertently perpetuated DL. Every time the word ‘post’ is used, we speak about something, which comes after the previous period. Post-humanism, post-modernism, post-structuralism, etc., and we now have post-genderism. This movement didn’t arise – as claimed – from the eroding of the cultural, psychological and social role of gender, but due to increased dissatisfaction with DL.

 

The erosion of binary gender has never been and will never be liberatory. It assumes more freedom but does the exact opposite. It is not gender, which is an arbitrary and unnecessary limitation to human potential, but, DL, our usual, insensitive way of talking. The loosening of gender roles or the disappearance of social stratification, could not come about with DL and is only going to happen, if we can have EL.

 

With EL, no hormone-treatment is needed, as there will be no body-dysphoria. Moreover, this notion of discomfort and distress, about one’s gender identity, is caused by one’s DL, but not by one’s body. The issue is not, to create more so-called identity-groups – for political reasons, so that the democratic Biden administration can mobilize a diverse coalition of minorities – but to address and stop our DL, so we can have EL.

 

It is only with DL, that gender-identity ideology is forced on us. Moreover, people who should be busy with medicine, government, education and psychology, shouldn’t redefine sex into a meaningless multidimensional construct, with the purpose to dominate or exploit others. We will be just human with EL, but not transhuman.   

 Conscious,

 

You are conscious, when you listen to yourself while you speak. So, your Embodied Language (EL) is because you know, absolutely certain, that you have EL. Once you have had some EL, you are also conscious, that sometimes, you still have Disembodied Language (DL), because your conditioning history continues to linger, even after you have discovered, that you can have EL.

 

You are conscious of your EL and your DL, in the same way, that you are conscious, that you are walking or that you are eating. In other words, walking and eating, are two kinds of behaviors, which can be done in a conscious way or not. It isn’t nice, to engage in DL, because you are not listening to yourself, and you are disconnecting from yourself. Likewise, it isn’t nice either, to walk, without knowing, where you are going or to eat, by stuffing yourself and by getting obese.

 

Due to your DL – although it is painful, stressful, frustrating, troubling, chaotic, sad, effortful and dissatisfying – you constantly engage into many behaviors of which you are unconscious. Once you become capable of having ongoing EL, you will stop the entire behavioral repertoire, which is associated with your DL. This is a process of selection by consequences, about which you have become conscious, because you talk with yourself, and you write about your behavior.

 

As the previous paragraphs have very succinctly described, being conscious of our behavior, isn’t – as we are inclined to believe in DL – an inner process, in which we imagine, there are words or sentences inside of us, but it is a matter of using our language correctly. DL is incorrect, in the same way, that being lost or walking around in circles, is incorrect or obsessive eating and stuffing yourself with food would be incorrect.

 

Being conscious is not a moral, social issue, but a personal, individual issue. Being conscious of our behavior, we realize the difference between the by DL-conditioned group-behaviors, which don’t belong to us, and the natural, effortless, graceful behaviors, which belong to us, and always have good outcomes, as they are based on the continuation of our EL. The latter is the repertoire our Language Enlightenment (LE).  

 

In DL, we don’t want to admit, that we don’t listen to ourselves, while we speak, because we are always, unconsciously, fighting with other so-called communicators, who are, of course, in reality, our adversaries – to get them to listen to us, to attract their attention, to what we are saying, to make them accept us, respect us and acknowledge us – and we also don’t want to make it seem, as if we are having any trouble understanding, what others are saying – as we don’t want them to know, we are not listening to them, we are not obeying them, we are not interested in them, we are not respecting them, loving, adoring and praising them, by paying attention to them – as that would indicate, to those who have social authority over others, we are disobedient, unintelligent, crazy, anti-social, lazy, criminal or simply having too much fun. 

 

Being conscious is a subversive, revolutionary act, as everyone, who behaves unconsciously, immediately notices, you are not like them. In effect, they become conscious because of you. This is especially obvious, when you no longer participate in the usual DL, which is going on everywhere and when you, in spite of their DL, continue to express your LE, with your EL and with all your other behaviors. Although people behave unconsciously, due to their DL, when they are near you, something changes in them and they don’t know or can’t find out what it is, unless they begin to talk with themselves and listen to themselves and explore their own EL.         

 

Imagine,

 

I don’t imagine, I have Embodied Language (EL), I have it. Also, I don’t imagine, I have stopped my own Disembodied Language (DL), because I have EL. You can only have EL, if your DL has been stopped. If this offends you, it is because you have, in vain, tried to stop your DL, that is why, you can only, perpetually, imagine having EL. You imagine all kinds of nonsense, but what you really want, is what you can’t have. EL is not a fantasy, but a reality, but DL is your ugly reality, from which you try to escape with your fantasy.

 

You even imagine – with coercive, stubborn, unnatural, arrogant DL – that it is needed, to be offended by someone like me, who has EL, but isn’t helping you, because he doesn’t want to talk with you, as that would be a waste of time. I don’t want to talk with anyone, who has DL, as it never changes. I rather have EL by myself and today, I want to write like this, to let you know, EL has nothing to do with your imagination.

 

Only when you have acknowledged, addressed and accepted your disgusting, brutal, unintelligent, chaotic DL, will it stop, and, only then, will your EL be possible. Surely, I will never ask you: can you imagine that? This dreaming, visualizing or seeing in your mind’s eye, always assumes inner language, private speech or thought, but EL, is about the sound, only you can produce and hear. It is completely irrelevant, whether others will hear the sound of your EL, as, in EL, they will listen to their own voice. Everyone hears themselves, in EL, that is why listening to others is no problem.

 

During EL, you give attention to everything that asks your attention, by saying it out loud and by listening to the sound of your voice, while you are saying it. You hear and experience whether what you have addressed is no longer asking your attention. Maybe you talk with yourself about what you feel, remember, hear, smell, look at or want to do later and you just let your attention jump from one thing to the other. So, you don’t imagine the liberation of your EL, as you actually create it.

 

During DL, you are trying to imagine and figure out, who you really are, and, yes, you are also trying to imagine and figure out, who the other people are, but, neither you are, who you imagine or believe yourself to be, nor are the others, who you imagine or believe them to be.

 

John Lennon is only just one of the millions of idiots, who sang, wrote, screamed, preached, prayed, meditated or talked about imagining a world of peace, without materialism, without borders separating nations and without religion. A peaceful, realistic, pragmatic man wouldn’t encourage anyone to imagine, what the world would be like without the freedom, which could only come about in a capitalistic system, while, basically, endorsing communism.  

 

Once we are having ongoing EL, we are no living in fantasies, we are no longer speaking in contradictory, nebulous language, because our language creates the reality, which we, as individuals, want and can have. Moreover, we will realize, once and for all, imagination equals escapism and cowardice. Indeed, it is always in DL, that manipulative people tell others to imagine, while they take advantage of their gullibility.

 

Coward,

 

Everyone who still engages in Disembodied Language (DL) is a coward. Turning-Your-Back-O’Drama-Always-Crying-For-His-Mama is as good an example as any. He is the definitive proof, that any needy coward can become president. Surely, Joke-By-Gone-Hiding was anointed by this previous expert in Jerckology, Stupology and Filthology (JSF), three new disciplines, taught, in one course, at all major universities, online on Tik-Tok, as the inevitable next level of DEI and Critical Race Theory, instead of science.

 

The Always-Playing-With-Words-On-Emotions, Israel-Jew-Hating, Melo-Drama-O'Bamboozle had the audacity to write a slimy Passover message. I have read it and here is my comment. He talks about Jewish families, as if he has any empathy for those, who got taken hostage or were harmed and killed by Hamas, but the fact is, he is hyper-actively, virtue-signaling to People-Of-All-Religions, which, of course, We-The-People-Who-Are-Still-Here know, that this means, Muslims-In-The-United-States, to which the Pedo-Panderer-In-Chief is in vain trying to reach out, to win the next election.

 

Oh, yes, let’s talk about celebrating Passover and invoke feelings of togetherness, during the traditional seder meal – why is this not spelled with capital letters? – because, after all, the Democrats, in general, are such traditionalists?  Throw in That-All-Important-Speech-Word: Love, as you harp on your ever-lasting-happy memories in the Miraculously-Still-Called-White-House – how is it even possible, that name hasn’t yet been changed by your Corrupt-BLM-Friends? – where you and your communist’ comrades were creepily laughing about the Awfully-Tasting-Political-Language-Soup, you are still trying to serve, with its Upbeat-Hope-Giving focus on what should be said softly, kindly and understood as one Big-Inter-Sectional-Magic word: Resilience-Redemption- Even-Renewal-In-The-Face-Of-Persecution-And-Uncertainty.

 

The-Man-Who-Always-Hides-Behind-His-Wife is a coward, as it doesn’t ring true, to anyone with half a brain, the Snake-Oil-Salesman and his Anonymously-Target-Shopping-Wife-Michelle don't give a damn about those hostages, who are still alive. All they have ever really cared about, is to score Insidious-Political-Society-Demolishing points. Surely, there aren’t any Muslims, who care about Passover, because they want to wipe Israel and the Jewish people off the map. This Former-Religiously-Flip-Flopping-President, like the current, presumably, Democracy-Uniting-Saving-Scranton-From-Tyranny-President, wants to make it seem, as if Muslims are interested in Remembering-Everyone-Who-Is-Unable-To-Celebrate-The-Holiday-With-Their-Loved-Ones. This is such disingenuousness. Reading these words, let alone saying them out loud, so you would hear your own nasty voice, would make you want to Throw-Up-Inside-Of-Your-Mouth.

 

Another coward, Noam Chomsky, the hero of the left, who in a conversation with me – yes, I got a brief phone-conference with him, because he was, apparently, a little bit interested, in the importance of Embodied Language (EL) – simply refused to listen himself, when I let him know, that he wasn’t listening to himself and then he hung up on me. Being-Tirelessly-Humanistic-And-Uncompromising-With-DL (!) is where we got ourselves today. Like so many people, primarily on the left, Chomsky, as a speaker, wants others to listen to him, but is not interested in listening to himself and being able to have ongoing EL. In essence, Chomsky just wants to dominate the conversation and he has done this, by writing many books, which perpetuate the assumption, that something is going to change about human interaction, by reading and studying what has been written. This hoax is taught in all the colleges and universities. Also, few people still remember, this Incendiary-Linguist-Turned-Political-Activist, this Communist-Atrocity-Denying-Apologist was vehemently against B.F. Skinner’s Radical Behaviorism, the scientific approach to human behavior. This coward became the leader of the Utterly-Failed-Phony-Cognitive-Revolution, the academic movement, which is against science, but in favor of perpetuating DL, at any cost.    

 

Going back to the Loss-Suffering-You-Find-Your-Bed-As-You-Make-It-Gaza-Loving coward, who is trying to manipulatively and provocatively use Passover – an occasion on which people want to peacefully come together – once again, to pretend, as if He-Reaffirms-His-Commitment-To-The-Jewish-People, by merely Speaking-Empty-Words-And-Calling-For, what all these Crazy-Israel-And-America-Hating protesters are calling for, namely a cease-fire. Seder Meal is not the occasion to mourn the loss of Gazans.

 

I don’t care about any religion, as they always make it seem, as if religion is more important than our actual interactions with one another. As a freedom-loving individual, I don’t believe that Brutal-Fanatical-People-Who-Are-Willing-To-Destroy-Everyone-To-Have-Their-Way, have any right on safety or security, to practice their Aggressive-Disrespectful-Backward-Religion. So, to wish the Jewish people Chag Sameach, which means Happy Holiday, is an insult, because it is used to divert attention, to score political points with Muslims. It is the act of a coward, who was the president and who continues to incite violence. Likewise, Bernie Sanders, who said, you can’t negotiate with Hamas, is also a Coward-Without-A-Backbone, as he only said that to score political points.                         

 

Donors, 

 

Now that it has become evident, that practically all the major universities are anti-Israel and are, in fact, supporting Hamas, and, basically, don’t do anything, to protect the lives and the rights of Jewish students, it must be acknowledged, by the wealthy donors, that they have created this monstrous antisemitism, which currently is happening around the country, and, which, of course, is based on the anti-intellectual, woke, hateful bullshit, that is taught by our so-called educators. I ask anyone with money to spend, to now promote our Embodied Language (EL).

 

Everyone who wonders, how we got to where we are now, should know, we are where we are today, in our culture, in our society, because of our unconscious involvement in Disembodied Language (DL). It is astonishing that institutions of learning haven’t yet embraced the distinction between DL and EL. As long as we continue to be in denial of these different ways of dealing with our language, DL is going to wreak havoc, while it escalates, into violence and chaos, as it has always done from the beginning of time.

 

Don’t get me wrong, I don’t need any money from irresponsible donors, to do research on DL or EL. I know exactly what I am talking about. The truth about the great importance of the difference between DL and EL doesn’t depend on funding for research. Besides, I don’t have anything to prove to anyone, but I provide an opportunity for foolish, guilty, wealthy idiots, to redeem themselves and pour their money into something worthwhile. If they put their money into the dissemination of what I say about the validity of the DL/EL distinction, they would, literally, put their money where their mouth is.

 

Truly idealistic donors, have every reason, to be unhappy and outraged, about how their gift has been wasted, by the school, they once went to. They should feel remorseful for their misplaced loyalty, to the indoctrination, which goes on in the place of education. Preferably, their success should result into the success of others, but this is only going to happen, when they themselves acknowledge the difference between their own DL and EL. As of yet, there are no millionaires, who possess the courage and integrity, to give their support, to what the world really needs.

 

As a person, who has enthusiastically studied psychology – who got a Master of Arts and a Master of Science in clinical psychology, who almost reached the Ph.D., but dropped out, at the last moment, while writing his dissertation, as he could no longer tolerate the abuse, the utter disregard and the arrogant disrespect, for the very reason, he went into psychology, in the first place – I know, like nobody else, because I have studied it, I have worked in it, and I have taught it, that ‘mental’ health in the United States and in other countries, is a total joke. Not only millions of dollars, but millions of people are going down the drain, because our DL rules in every section of society, including academia.

 

Where the hell is this so-called stewardship, the relationship-building process, to form, to foster, these wonderful, positive, long-term bonds, which, presumably, occur after a gift is given? The bottom-line is: with DL, this never happens. We imagine such connections, but EL cannot be bought. The only bang, which anyone gets for their buck, which is, inadvertently, spend on DL, is more of the same, superficial, disastrous DL.

 

Here’s a little anecdote. Years ago, I was doing some volunteer work at a free health clinic. All I did was hang out and engage in EL, with the poor folks, who came in, to get some free care. A man came to me, who had heard about me from his wife, who, as a nurse, also volunteered her time at the clinic. Surprisingly, he wanted to talk with me about my ‘method’. Apparently, he was a millionaire and wanted to support me in writing about book about DL and EL. However, to make sure his money would be well-spend, he insisted, he wanted to sit in on the meetings he would arrange with a ghost-writer, so my book about the DL/EL distinction would become a best-seller. The only problem was, neither he, nor this well-established ghost-writer, had any interest in discovering – for themselves – what the immense difference between their own DL and EL was all about. Hilariously, this seemingly generous opportunity turned into a fiasco, and, eventually, I said: forget about it, because the millionaire and the ghost-writer, were unwilling to acknowledge their own DL. The same is true for psychiatrists, professors, priests, politicians, therapists, parents, painters, astrologers, behaviorists, singers, gurus, actors, magicians, writers, journalists or bosses, just to name a few...

 

Going back to the donors of the universities, which have become the breeding ground for communism, antisemitism, anti-Americanism, anti-free-speechism and anti-individualism, it is no surprise, this is all happening. As someone, who is able to have ongoing EL, who enjoys his well-deserved Language Enlightenment (LE), I know, the DL, that is still going on everywhere, is on its deathbed. DL, our usual way of dealing with language, is not the future, only our EL is.

 

If any of the – hopefully – upset donors are, as they have often claimed to be, still interested in the preservation of human dignity, they should consider my offer and contact me, to get to the bottom of the quintessential issue of our time. I talk with anyone, who is willing to stop their DL, so that they can have an experience of their EL. Technology can’t help us to have EL. Someone like me is needed, as I know what DL and EL is.

 

The job of supervising how these donations are spent or what their impacts might be, is in the interest of the institutions, who want to keep milking more money from their wealthy donors. Obviously, I don’t have any faith in any of these bureaucratic, political organizations, that is why, I speak directly to each millionaire, since they have the means to help me let everyone know about EL. Naturally, they have to want to know about EL themselves and they must admit, that they have wasted their money due to their DL.

 

Historically, in philanthropy, there was this idea that once a big gift was made, the mandatory ritual of thanking and honoring and praising the terrific, wonderful, fantastic donor occurred, so that he or she, would feel inclined to give again, but, other than that, there was no expectation. However, this shallow, tribal, arrangement is, of course, hopelessly outdated. In essence, we all, somehow, know, something is wrong with our DL, but we are not busy with our own language enough, to be able to stop our DL and have EL. It requires EL, to establish meaningful, ongoing engagement between donors and institutions.

 

People only give things to others, because they care about them. This is the problem with EL, because anyone, who will find out about it, wants to share it with others, but every time they do this with people, who only know how to have DL, their gift is squandered. Only good communication – EL – can assure us, everything will go according to plan. Let me be very clear: I only want to talk with those, who want to have EL with me. Yes, I care very much about what happens with my donation and if there are any millionaires out there, who are bored and tired with their own fake DL, I look forward to talking with them, so that we can enrich each other.      

 

Pink Full Moon,

 

Before I write some stories about the moon, I want the reader to know, these are just stories. However, stories are events in a person’s life, which become associated with whatever was happening at the moment these stories were told and listened to. This is known as Classical Conditioning or learning through the pairing of stimuli. May be, you have heard or read about the experiment, in which Ivan Pavlov paired food with the sound of a bell and made the dog salivate, after repeatedly pairing the sound of the bell with the food arrival. A dog, normally, doesn’t salivate, when hearing a bell, but a conditioned dog surely will have this response.

 

We are biological organisms, who learn through Classical as well as Operant conditioning. In the latter, antecedent stimuli precede a behavioral response, which is then socially reinforced by a postcedent stimulus. Operant and Classical condition are scientific procedures that predict the future-probability of a behavioral response.       

 

The unpleasant, unnatural, effortful sound of your voice, during your usual way of talking, which I call Disembodied Language (DL), is a very different sound, than the sound, which you only produce, on those rare occasions, in which you – unconsciously – were able to have some Embodied Language (EL). If you would talk out loud with yourself and listen to the sound of your own voice, while you speak, you would immediately hear this enormous difference. Moreover, you would prefer the sound of your EL and hate the sound of your own DL, as you will figure out, why you never wanted to listen to yourself. Although you have little knowledge about or experience with the sound of your EL, you experience and know immediately, that it is associated with everything, that is positive and desirable, while the voice of your DL, is related to everything that is negative and wrong in your life. Yes, the voice, which you use every day sounds strange, as you feel it has prevented you from being who you are and have always been. Your EL was never reinforced, as there was no one who knew enough about it, to reinforce it.  

 

During your DL – which, I repeat, is your usual way of talking – the sound of your own voice is inadvertently paired with a broad self-defeating behavioral repertoire, but the sound of your EL – which was never consciously made – relates to the relatively small behavioral repertoire of your wellness. Simply stated, you are so lonely, troubled, unhappy, dissatisfied, vindictive, jealous, isolated, hateful, stressed, frustrated, nervous, confused, anxious, etc., etc., because stimuli in your environment constantly trigger all the behaviors, which perpetuate your DL.

 

The other day, everyone was suddenly talking about the solar eclipse, the alignment of the sun, the moon and the earth. The moon, which was directly between the sun and the earth, casted a shadow on our planet. This event happens only once every eighteen years. With eye-protection, the sun’s outer atmosphere, or corona, was visible, because the sun’s disc was completely covered by the moon. Many people went out of their way, to get to what is known as the Path of Totality, from where they were able to witness a total, rather than a partial eclipse. This event signified an unusual moment in which many human beings, were, relatively speaking, briefly, observing the same reality. A similar phenomenon occurs once you engage in EL.               

 

I have always loved the Full Moon. As a child, I was sitting alone, watching the full moon, from a branch of a small tree and I was listening to the beautiful singing of a bird. The streetlamps had already come on and I should be at home, for dinner, but I felt so comfortable in my tree, that I  wanted to stay there a little longer. Across from where I sat, were four-story apartment buildings, in which I knew every family. It was such a happy moment, which I would always remember, each time it was full moon again.    

 

Tomorrow, April 23, 2024, it is full moon. Why is it called Pink Moon? The word comes from the herb Pink Moss or Phlox Subulata, a wildflower, which blooms during early springtime. These flowers usually grow in the North American region. Thus, the name Pink Moon associates with Springtime. I find it interesting, through the Native American language, that the moon, in outer space, is colored by what is happening, here, in North California. Every year, there is a Pink Moon, the first full moon of Springtime.   

 

If one imagines the person, who first came up with this idea, he or she was walking through the fields, on a warm full moon’s night and was able to see these beautiful flowers. He or she was probably relieved, that the coldness of the winter was gone and looking forward to spring and summer. You could say, he or she was so happy, he or she saw the moon with colored glasses, although glasses didn’t exist back then.

 

On an uncloudy night, the full moon is seen by all human beings and everywhere they give a different meaning to it. The Pink Moon is an important event that marks many religious and cultural holidays and festivities. It has different names as per different cultures and different people. Christians call it Paschal Moon, which refers to the Eastern celebration. For Jewish people, Pink Moon marks Passover, a holiday on which they celebrate their freedom from Egypt. For Muslims, the Pink Moon signifies the end of the fasting month of Ramadan. For Hindus, Pink Moon is a reminder of the birth of Hanuman, which is an important figure in their religion. Also, Buddhists in Sri Lanka have a version of Pink Moon, called Bak Poya, to commemorate Buddha’s second visit to their country. The second time, somehow, was more significant…

 

Pink Moon is known by a variety of names and symbolizes Spring and fresh growth. It is called the Moon when streams are navigable again or the Breaking Ice Moon. Some call it Moon of the Red Grass appearing or Budding Moon of Plants and Shrubs. Elsewhere, Pink Moon is associated to animals. Moon when the Ducks come back, Moon when the Geese lay Eggs, Frog Moon or Sucker Moon. Sucker Fish are believed to come from the spirit world, to visit various water bodies on earth to purify them.

 

In my early twenties, I often went to a park, in the dark, where I tried to meditate at full moon. It was a hot and dry summer, which is unusual in the Netherlands, where it very often rains. Usually, I sat under a big tree, by a small pond, in which you could see the moon reflected. I could hear owls or the sniffling of a porcupine. One balmy night, I sat, for no apparent reason, on the other side of the pond, when something remarkable happened. With a huge crash, a large branch broke off of the tree I had been sitting under, just like that. If I had been sitting there, I might have been crushed. I stayed calm. A month later, when I returned to that same spot, the tree had been removed and after this, I never went back to that place again.

 

Looking back, I realize, once again, the whole story about meditation has become completely irrelevant to me. Also, I grew up in a Catholic family, but at some point, the story didn’t do anything for me anymore. Actually, I have never really believed in all these boring stories people are so carried away by. Our usual way of talking, which I call DL, is always some kind of dreadful story, but also a monologue. I have always been more interested in dialogue and that is EL. You can only have dialogue after your monologues have been stopped. EL can only happen if your DL has been addressed and therefore stopped. That Path of Totality, is, of course, when your EL can finally continue unobstructed. This is the total eclipse of your so-called mind, because, by listening to yourself speak, you will hear, there is nothing between you and your language.     

 

Begrijpen,

 

Wanneer gaan we eindelijk het enorme verschil ervaren tussen onze Ontlichaamde Taal (OT) en onze Belichaamde Taal (BT)? Zolang we dit verschil nog steeds proberen te begrijpen, staan ​​we onze ervaring van dit verschil niet toe.

 

De hele kwestie van begrip is, vanwege onze betrokkenheid bij OT iets dat volkomen verkeerd wordt begrepen.

 

Wanneer iemand iets zegt, lijken we problemen te hebben met het begrijpen van wat hij of zij zegt, omdat hij of zij zich bezighoudt met OT en geen verbinding maakt met wat hij of zij zegt.

 

In BT is er nooit – ja, absoluut nooit – een probleem om een ​​spreker te verstaan. Hoe kan dat nou? In BT luistert de spreker naar zichzelf terwijl hij of zij spreekt. Hierdoor is hij of zij een met wat hij of zij zegt.

 

De OT-luisteraar, die zegt de BT-spreker niet te begrijpen, die maakt uiteraard ook geen verbinding met deze spreker, aangezien hij of zij er zelf niet aan gewend is, om een verbinding te maken met zijn of haar eigen gesproken woorden.

 

Verbinding maken met wat we zelf zeggen of met wat iemand anders zegt, is geen kwestie van onszelf begrijpen of van iemand anders begrijpen, die met ons spreekt.

 

Verbinding maken met onszelf gaat vooraf aan ons vermogen om verbinding te maken met anderen – dat wil zeggen, als we geen verbinding maken met onszelf, dan kunnen we ook geen verbinding maken met anderen – en verbinding maken met elkaar maakt de weg vrij om elkaar te begrijpen.

 

Zonder verbinding met onszelf of met elkaar – zoals we altijd doen in OT – begrijpen we elkaar eigenlijk nooit echt, ook al doen we alsof we elkaar begrijpen.

 

We blijven problemen met elkaar hebben, omdat we geen verbinding hebben met onszelf of met elkaar, maar we zijn goed in het doen alsof alles in orde is, terwijl dat in werkelijkheid helemaal niet zo is.

 

Zoals gezegd, kunnen we ons niet met elkaar verbinden, voordat we ons met onszelf verbinden. Op dezelfde manier kunnen we elkaar niet begrijpen voordat we onszelf kunnen begrijpen.

 

Iedereen – in OT – blijft proberen, om anderen te begrijpen, waardoor ze geen verbinding kunnen maken met zichzelf en zichzelf kunnen begrijpen.

 

Vreemd genoeg, als we uiteindelijk – dankzij onze ervaring van onze voortdurende BT – gemakkelijk verbonden blijven met onszelf, volgt ons begrip van onszelf moeiteloos. Bovendien, aangezien onze eigen BT ons toont, dat er geen innerlijke taal bestaat, valt er in feite niets te begrijpen in BT.

 

Het zogenaamde begrip, waar we het tijdens OT altijd over hadden, was een verwijzing naar een niet-bestaand, door onze OT geproduceerd innerlijk verbaal proces. In BT daarentegen is het niet nodig om iets te weten of te begrijpen, omdat er in geen  innerlijke taal is. In BT staat de spreker altijd in contact met zichzelf en daarom maakt hij of zij een onmiddellijk verbinding met de luisteraar, die voelt dat er eigenlijk niets te begrijpen valt, omdat er alleen maar iets ervaren kan worden.

 

De vervelende, veeleisende, stressvolle nadruk – in de inspannende OT – op begrip heeft onze behoefte aan verbinding altijd verwaarloosd of afgewezen.

 

Zodra we – in BT – verbinding maken – met onszelf en elkaar – is begrip helemaal geen enkel probleem meer. Op dezelfde manier is er in OT altijd een hoop tam-tam over het zogenaamde problemen met het luisteren. Er wordt in OT ad nauseum herhaald, dat het begrip ontbreekt, omdat we weer niet luisteren of niet opletten. We zouden toch eindelijk eens betere luisteraars moeten worden, want dan zou er meer begrip zijn. Hoe hard we echter ook proberen, om naar de OT-spreker te luisteren, de OT-spreker luistert nooit naar zichzelf. Het is de luisteraar, die naar zo’n aandachtvragende spreker luistert, die hem of haar dus de illusie geeft, dat er naar hem of haar wordt geluisterd en dat er zelfs een soort van verbinding door hem of haar wordt gemaakt. Deze ‘verbinding’ – die niet door de OT-spreker, maar door de slaafse OT-luisteraar wordt gemaakt – vindt  niet echt plaats, omdat nog de OT-spreker, nog de OT-luisteraar in contact is met zichzelf of haarzelf. Bovendien is er in OT geen enkele sprake is van, dat de spreker, de luisteraar wordt en dat de luisteraar, de spreker kan worden. Er is in dit OT machts-vertoon geen beurt-wisseling, alleen bewondering, respect, onderdanigheid, opkijken naar, maar natuurlijk ook angst, wrok, vernedering en onderdrukking.

 

Het voorgaande beschreef hoe we met onze OT de sociale hiërarchie tot stand brengen en in stand houden. OT bepaalt wie de macht heeft, wie mag praten en wie dus is toegestaan om anderen te domineren en te dwingen, die onder hem of haar staan. Een dergelijke stomme, overal voorkomende power-trip verhindert natuurlijk iedere vorm begrip, omdat het in tegenspraak is met het hebben van een verbinding. Omdat er in zo'n OT-geval geen connectie is, ligt alle nadruk dus altijd op begrip.

 

In conclusie, het enige dat er toe doet in OT – onze gebruikelijke onnatuurlijke manier van praten – is dat de luisteraar de spreker gehoorzaamt, die niet naar zichzelf luistert. En ja, als de OT-luisteraar – die gewend is aan OT-sprekers – ooit eindelijk eens zelf aan het woord komt,  dan dwingt hij of zij zijn of haar eigen ‘luisteraar’, omdat hij of zij niet in staat is om verbinding met hem of haar te maken. Als gevolg hiervan gaat ons zogenaamde begrip van onszelf – in DL – altijd over wat we onbewust aan onszelf hebben opgedrongen en wat we, onbedoeld, aan anderen zullen opdringen.

 

Je kunt mij ook horen op mijn twee You Tube-kanalen maximuspeperkamp-hw8sw en Maximus Peperkamp. Je kunt met mij praten op Skype, stuur me eerst een email, dan maken we een afspraak. Hier is mijn emial adres: mpeperkamp@sbcglobal.net en hier is mijn skype naam: limbicease  Laat nou toch eens wat van je horen, zodat je BT kunt gaan ervaren en vanuit Taal Verlichting (TV) kunt gaan leven. Het is echt mogelijk. Je kunt ook naar de You Tube van AnnaMieke kijken en luisteren. Haar You Tube kanaal heet Luisterend Spreken. Ze spreekt heel mooi op haar eigen manier, in het Nederlands, over haar BT en TV. 

 

Kenmerken,

 

Nadat iemand zijn eigen Belichaamde Taal (BT) heeft verkend, niet slechts één of twee keer, maar meerdere keren – zo vaak mogelijk – raakt hij of zij vertrouwd met de kenmerken van zijn of haar Ontlichaamde Taal (OT) en zijn BT. Dezelfde criteria komen keer op keer terug en toch ervaar je elke keer weer iets nieuws. Alleen onze BT kan ons informeren over onze OT. Er is niets toevalligs aan, aangezien onze BT mogelijk is, dankzij ons bewustzijn van de onderscheidende kenmerken van zowel onze OT als onze BT.

 

Aanvankelijk lijken de verschillende kenmerken van BT ons op zichzelf intrigerend, maar naarmate wij voortgaan met BT, gaan ze op in dit majestueuze, nieuwe, robuuste gedragspatroon. Zeker, de schoonheid, samenhang, consistentie en creativiteit van onze BT is heel anders dan onze ongevoelige, ongemakkelijke, energievretende, tegenstrijdige, onnatuurlijke, inspannende, chaotische OT.

 

De realiteit van iemands Taal Verlichting (TV) wordt onthuld zodra iemand in staat is om door te gaan met BT. Onze eigen BT is voor ons het besef dat er absoluut geen taal binnenin ons is. Er is nooit een tekst gevonden in een menselijk lichaam. Deze afwezigheid van onhoorbare spraak, is iets dat ons geloof in een innerlijk zelf, psyche of het hebben van  gedachten, ontkracht. Het kost uiteraard enige tijd om onze conditionering met OT tegen te gaan, maar het begint uiteindelijk geheel vanzelf tot ons door te dringen, omdat we, keer op keer, met BT onszelf blijven laten weten wat we willen en ook kunnen zeggen. We ervaren met absolute zekerheid, dat er bij het loslaten van onze BT of bij de verstilling van  onze BT, er geen innerlijke ik is, die ervoor zorgt, dat wij ons zo gedragen zoals we doen, omdat we waarheidsgetrouw, stil, vredig en echt leeg zijn.

 

Als mensen in de war of overrompeld zijn, zeggen ze soms: ik kon niets bedenken. Met BT ontdekken we echter, dat dit blanco zijn, onze TV en dus onze natuurlijke staat is. Ook als iemand afgeleid is, dan zeggen we: hij of zij is er niet echt. In dit geval wordt de persoon kennelijk intern gestimuleerd. De crux van BT is, dat wanneer we doorgaan met het uiten, verwoorden en hardop zeggen, in onze eigen klank, met onze eigen woorden, op onze eigen manier, wat we geloven te denken of menen te ervaren, dat dan onze denkbeeldige interne spraak zomaar stopt, aangezien deze sowieso nooit echt heeft bestaan.

 

Als we ons bezighouden met BT, in plaats van met OT, dan lijkt het alsof we stil worden vanwege BT,  maar dat is niet wat er gebeurt. Bij BT zijn we altijd stil. Er is dus geen wordingsproces. Desalniettemin ervaren we een aangename, vernieuwende stroom van belevenissen. Daarom zegt deze verwijzing naar stil worden nog steeds iets over de conditionerings geschiedenis met OT. Met onze OT kunnen we niet toelaten, ervaren en begrijpen, hoe het is om te  ontspannen, open en ontvankelijk te zijn, omdat we altijd op onze hoede en bang blijven. Stil worden in OT is altijd het gevolg van niet spreken. Als gevolg daarvan hebben we tijdens BT nog de neiging om, vanuit onze oude gewoonte, te zeggen, dat we stil zijn geworden, door het spreken. Maar, in BT zijn we al stil zodra we ermee beginnen. Dit blijkt elke keer als wij ons ermee bezighouden en dit komt omdat wij begrijpen, dat er geen innerlijke taal is.

 

Deze kenmerken zijn allemaal waarneembaar en verfieerbaar, omdat ze hoorbaar zijn, terwijl wij met onszelf spreken en luisteren naar het geluid van onze eigen stem. Onze oren zijn eraan gewend en zijn dus geconditioneerd, om het geluid van OT te horen, dat we elke dag en overal horen. We hebben de neiging, om het stem geluid van ons welzijn – dat we dus zelden maken en bijna nooit of horen – eruit te filteren en als gevolg daarvan produceren we dit energie-gevende, welkome, prettige, kalmerende geluid niet en kunnen wij het niet horen, omdat het niet door ons wordt geproduceerd. Het lijkt alsof we allemaal doof zijn voor het geluid van onze BT, die we alleen produceren als we naar onszelf luisteren terwijl we spreken. Er is echter niets echt mis met onze oren, onze doofheid is slechts een kwestie van onze conditionering. We kunnen dus nog steeds – zonder enige voorbereiding of oefening – het geluid van BT maken. Wij kunnen het horen en opnieuw worden beïnvloed door de resonerende vibratie van wat ons taal-welzijn zou moeten worden genoemd.

 

Onze tegenstrijdige, gewelddadige, verontrustende conditionerings geschiedenis met OT doet ons allen  geloven, dat wij gedachten, dat wij een geest, dat wij innerlijke taal zouden hebben, maar iedere keer als  wij weer zeggen wat we veronderstellen te denken, dan verdwijnt het. In feite komen we er zo achter, dat de afwezigheid van ons denken onze natuurlijke staat is. We hebben dus eigenlijk nooit iets gedacht. . Elke keer dat we aan onszelf zeggen, wat er nu weer in onze zogenaamde geest speelt, dan voelen we ons heel opgelucht of bevrijd. Dit is niet het geval zolang we nog blijven bezighouden met automatische OT. Tijdens OT zorgt onze illusie van innerlijke verbale constructies, ideeën, concepten en overtuigingen ervoor dat we allerlei vreselijke daden verrichten, om maar te rechtvaardigen, dat wij gelijk hebben, en anderen ongelijk. We voeren onze religieuze en culturele oorlogen dus niet – zoals we allemaal geneigd zijn te geloven, met OT – over hoorbare of leesbare taal, maar altijd over onze innerlijke, gefantaseerde en dus onhoorbare taal. We zijn inderdaad bereid te sterven voor belachelijke fantasieën en we offeren onze individualiteit op, om onze overtuiging te behouden, dat we tot een bepaalde groep behoren.

 

Wanneer wij, keer op keer, hardop, alleen, tegen onszelf, onze verontrustende, verwarde, negatieve gedachtes zeggen en onderzoeken – en luisteren naar de klank van onze stem – dan horen we een verandering in het geluid van onze stem, wanneer we overschakelen van OT naar BT. Er klinkt dan ineens een zucht van opluchting en onze BT onthult iets over ons, dat waar is, maar dat we voorheen bij OT niet konden zeggen of weten. Nu we het zeggen, denken we het niet meer, omdat de woorden, die we spreken nooit in ons hebben gezeten. We zeggen tegen onszelf: er zitten geen woorden of zinnen in onze hersenen. We horen en voelen dat het interne gesprek met onszelf, dat we dachten te voeren, slechts een illusie was, gecreëerd door OT, onze gebruikelijke manier van praten. Ons zogenaamde verstand, de dwaze fantasie van innerlijke taal, is een fictie, die werd gecreëerd en onderhouden door onze OT, waarin we niet mochten zeggen, wat we wilden zeggen en wat we nu perfect kunnen zeggen.

 

Onze OT en BT zijn te herkennen aan blijvende kenmerken. Zodra deze zijn geïdentificeerd, zullen wij beslist de voorkeur gaan geven aan BT en een afschuw gaan hebben voor OT. In het begin lijken we nog onze TV te bereiken met onze BT, maar naarmate we verder gaan met onze BT, dan beseffen we, dat we eigenlijk altijd al zo zijn geweest. Onze ware natuur was natuurlijk altijd al het geval, maar nu hebben we er de juiste taal voor.

 

Wij hebben we het gevoel, dat we altijd op zoek zijn geweest naar BT. We hebben, onbewust, altijd BT willen hebben. Onze persoonlijke conditionerings geschiedenis is analoog aan de geschiedenis van de gehele mensheid. Dit geeft een diepgaand inzicht in wat niet alleen ons gemeenschappelijke probleem was en is, maar ook ons ​​gemeenschappelijke lot of doel: onze eigen OT te overwinnen, zodat wij eindelijk BT kunnen hebben.

 

Ieder mens heeft een zenuw stelsel, waardoor we allemaal zoveel mogelijk onze homeostase willen bereiken en behouden. Ideaal gesproken, zijn het bewust gesproken woorden, die dit zelf-en-anderen regulerende proces vertegenwoordigen, waardoor we stabiliteit behouden, terwijl we ons aanpassen aan de omstandigheden, die optimaal zijn om te overleven. Onze OT verhindert ons ervan, om met onszelf over onze fysiologische ervaringen te praten en om naar onzelf te luisteren, en om te reageren op wat ons lichaam zegt van nature. Het is duidelijk dat de primaire behoefte aan homeostase alleen kan worden voldaan door onze BT, maar nooit door OT. Als biologische organismen er dus in slagen om homeostase te bereiken, dan gaat het leven door, maar als dat niet lukt, volgt er een ramp of de dood.

 

We sterven niet noodzakelijkerwijs vanwege onze stomme OT, maar we creëren allerlei tragedies en problemen. Bovendien verwerven we met onze dissociatieve, ongevoelige OT nooit, wat biologen dynamisch evenwicht noemen, de stabiliteit waarin continue verandering plaatsvindt, terwijl er relatief uniforme omstandigheden heersen. Bedreiging is de enige uniforme omstandigheid die OT veroorzaakt. Of we het nu toegeven of niet, er wel of niet over willen of kunnen praten, alle mensen delen dezelfde biologische kenmerken. Als zij zich bedreigd voelen, willen ze meestal weg van wat hen bedreigd. Daarom is ontwijkings-gedrag – overleving – het belangrijkste gedrag wat wij hebben. Dit betekent, wat onze taal betreft, dat wij allemaal eigenlijk helemaal geen OT willen hebben en dat wij dus allemaal, onbewust, alleen maar BT zouden willen. Alleen bij BT voelen wij ons pas veilig, zijn we echt op ons gemak en onszelf, omdat we ons volledig kunnen uiten en ons tevreden en trots voelen op al onze ervaringen.

 

Hoe meer we kunnen doorgaan met onze BT, hoe meer de kenmerken ervan, maar ook de kenmerken van onze OT ons bekend worden. Met BT drukken we een weldadig gevoel van volledigheid uit, waarin we blijven experimenteren, groeien, leren, genieten en ontdekken. Er is nooit een stop in de stroom van het leven, die evenzeer deel uitmaakt van onze taal als van onze lichamelijke ervaring. Deze link tussen onze taal en wat we in ons lichaam ervaren – terwijl we spreken – vormt de kern van BT. Omdat BT onze ervaringen correct uitdrukt, is het niet nodig om heen en weer te slingeren tussen onze taal en onze ervaring, omdat onze BT onze ervaringen direct, nauwkeurig en bevredigend ten gehore brengt. In OT is dit echter helemaal nooit het geval. Op elk gegeven moment lopen we ófwel helemaal hopeloos vast in de beschrijvingen van ervaringen, die we proberen te beschrijven, óf zijn we gefixeerd op, gehinderd door of verlamd door de ervaringen zelf, zonder dat we er verbaal enige betekenis aan kunnen geven.

 

Ons vermogen om in BT kalm en 

veilig over onze lichamelijke 

gewaarwordingen te spreken,

hangt samen met ons vermogen 

om onze emoties correct en

bevredigend te verwoorden en

 uit te drukken. Zoals we allemaal 

wel weten, is het gemakkelijker 

om zonder emoties over onze 

ervaringen te praten, dan om 

met emoties over onze ervaringen

 te praten. In BT wordt het ons 

eindelijk duidelijk, dat praten 

over onze ervaringen – zonder

 dat wij over onze emoties praten

 – natuurlijk niet echt praten is 

over onze ervaringen. Dit is wat

 we doen in OT en wat natuurlijk

 nooit succesvol kan zijn, omdat

 dit onbedoeld resulteert in het

 spreken over emoties, terwijl 

we onze ervaringen verwaarlozen.

 Terwijl we dus, in OT, allemaal 

alleen maar doen alsof wij het 

niet hebben over onze emoties, 

hebben wij het allemaal, 

voortdurend, ongemerkt, 

over wat we voelen. In OT

 zouden we zogenaamd 

afzonderlijk over onze 

ervaringen en onze emoties

 kunnen praten, wat natuurlijk

 een complete leugen is.

 

Tijdens OT gaan we allemaal zogenaamd akkoord met het idiote idee, dat we afzonderlijk over onze emoties en ervaringen kunnen praten. De realiteit van onze nep OT is dat we alleen kunnen praten over wat doen, maar niet over onze ervaring, niet over onze emoties. In beide gevallen blijven we onvolledig en proberen we ons onvermogen, om ons volledig uit te drukken, te compenseren.

 

Er zijn ook enkele verschillen binnen OT. Degenen met OT, die meer geneigd zijn om hun gevoelens te uiten, veroordelen altijd degenen, die meer geneigd zijn om hun handelingen te bespreken. Uiteraard is het tegenovergestelde net zo waar, aangezien degenen, met OT, die eerder geneigd zijn om wat ze doen of wat gedaan moet worden centraal te stellen, altijd degenen veroordelen die hun emoties uiten, omdat dat de zaak zogezegd alleen maar ophoudt. Het algemene uitgangspunt van OT is, dat de laatste groep de eerstgenoemde groep altijd domineert en dat, ‘normaal’ gesproken, de uitdrukking van onze emotioneel verstoken, zogenaamde objectieve of wetenschappelijke ervaring altijd belangrijker lijkt te zijn dan de uitdrukking van onze emoties, die evenwel de belangrijkste feedback fenomenen zijn, die gelijktijdig met ons handelen plaatsvinden.

 

De adaptieve kenmerken van onze BT mogen zeer zeker niet worden onderschat. Als iemand in staat is om BT te hebben, dan heeft hij of zij dat, ondanks de OT, die altijd en overal plaatsvindt en ondanks zijn of haar eigen conditionerings geschiedenis met OT. In OT mogen we in principe alleen praten over wat we doen, maar niet over hoe we ons nou eigenlijk voelen bij wat we doen. Natuurlijk gaan al onze verwaarloosde gevoelens niet zomaar weg en komen ze altijd weer ergens ineens opduiken. Zoals gezegd, compenseren we met allerlei wangedrag voor het niet kunnen uiten van onze gevoelens en voor het niet kunnen voelen. De onzinnige dingen die we doen om van onszelf af te komen, hebben nadelige gevolgen voor de gezondheid en beperken ernstig ons vermogen om met onszelf en elkaar om te gaan. In onze BT komt alles wat we in OT hebben ontkend weer onder de aandacht en wordt het uitgedrukt met aandacht, acceptatie en integratie.

 

BT heeft zeker intellectuele en wetenschappelijke kenmerken, maar OT is hopeloos anti-intellectueel. Om het bot te zeggen, OT, onze gebruikelijke manier van praten, is een ontkenning van onze menselijke natuur. Bij OT doen we het voorkomen dat de ideale manier om te communiceren is om beleefd en open te zijn, zodat we elkaar accepteren en begrijpen, maar in BT proberen we niet beleefd, bewust of open te zijn. We doen geen enkele moeite in BT, om te luisteren of om iemand dus te accepteren of te begrijpen, omdat we echt open zijn, omdat we echt spreken en luisteren en accepteren en begrijpen. Deze moeiteloze kenmerken van BT tonen onze TV.