Uh... I wasn't sure what all the axes were there?
-
-
Replying to @Meaningness
The axes on my 2×2×2 are a bit confused, because I added the colorful grid diagonally, basically dissolving the original {individualist-collectivist} axis into being a function of both avoidance and anxiety (as separate axes). Note that it's not intended to be about attachment...
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Malcolm_Ocean @Meaningness
Malcolm 🙃cean Retweeted Malcolm 🙃cean
...but about some more general underlying thing, like "closeness" and "autonomy".https://twitter.com/Malcolm_Ocean/status/1115663179810574337 …
Malcolm 🙃cean added,
Malcolm 🙃cean @Malcolm_OceanReplying to @Malcolm_Ocean @mattgoldenbergLots of 2×2s that map onto the attachment styles one. Slightly more central might even be this one around "closeness & independence" (I might call the latter "autonomy" or "self-authorship") https://www.mentalhelp.net/blogs/the-dance-of-intimacy-and-autonomy/ … pic.twitter.com/f6bXLYRB8O1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Malcolm_Ocean
Hmm. I don’t think the sutra/tantra distinction relates to this at all. Tantra, in particular, is mostly not about individual psychology, nor about human relationships as they are understood in Western psychotherapeutic terms.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Meaningness @Malcolm_Ocean
Would love to see you elaborate on this! What's the difference between the tantric and psychotherapeutic views here? I have two guesses, one about "true self" and one about locating relationships in minds vs. in interactions...?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @QiaochuYuan @Malcolm_Ocean
Well... they are such different systems that it's hard to bring them together to compare them at all. People have been doing so since at least Jung, so apparently it's tempting and makes some sort of sense. I admit to doing it myself too, while worrying it's a mistake.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
For the most part, tantra just doesn't talk about everyday human relationships at all. And it also just doesn't talk about everyday personal psychology at all. However, it's tempting to take what it does say and try to apply it to personal psychology and relationships, >
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
> and that does seem to yield valuable insights. But it's a dubious enterprise.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
However, I think your second guess is accurate: if you look at interpersonal relationships with tantra in mind, you’re likely to see them interactionally rather than mentally. This book is about that. (Warnings: content difficult; link may be nsfw.)https://amzn.to/2XoFsmU
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness @QiaochuYuan
Mmmm, interaction. Btw
@QiaochuYuan I've read that book (~2y ago) and I also think you'd like it.1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
Replying to @Malcolm_Ocean @Meaningness
I think I would too! But my stack of books to read is already so high (for me anyway):pic.twitter.com/rEHLHT0uju
12:40 PM - 19 Apr 2019
0 replies
0 retweets
3 likes
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.