Re: That was science
Posted by Sparrow on Jan 30, 2002 at 12:28
Re: That was science (Dale)
Dale, a word of concern.
It's been over two years that I've watched you poke at Daniel. He's been playing this game all his life and you just don't think like he does. Let me tell you from my observations, you're not getting to him. You're getting to YOU. You empower him to control YOUR physiology with your reactions. He lives with his choices, as we all do with our own. We all answer for that later, y'know? Let it go -- reread a bit of what I posted 'way below about belief and science (more on this later)...
"The Stress-Modified Response:
The normal stress response is upset by emotional stimuli. These can be real, imagined, or merely apperceived symbols of prior threats and demands. Once set into motion, there is little that can be done to significantly modify an individual's H-P-A response. Indeed, if it were possible, it would almost certainly require a resetting of the customary attitudes leading to the individual's choice of response. It may be possible to influence the response behaviorally, but this lies outside the domain of biological and physiological sciences.13
Sapolsky discovered that the number of events that occurred to the animals he studied was less important than their reaction style and how they perceived and coped with the stressors.11 As Hans Selye has said:
"...both on the cellular and the interpersonal level, we do not always recognize what is and what is not worth fighting."6(p.41)"
Dale, "get" that last part and take it to heart. I'm sincere in my concern.
- Re: That was science Dale 31/1 10:50 (25)
- Re: That was science Shasta 14/2 18:03 (0)
- If my comments "got" to you.... Sparrow 01/2 07:41 (1)
- Re: If my comments "got" to you.... Dale 01/2 08:50 (0)
- Re: That was science mara 31/1 12:59 (21)
- Re: That was science Shasta 14/2 18:05 (0)
- Re: That was science Dale 01/2 09:18 (11)
- Re: That was science Shasta 14/2 18:58 (0)
- Re: That was science mara 08/2 11:28 (9)
- Re: That was science Dale 09/2 10:32 (8)
- Re: That was science mara 12/2 12:45 (2)
- Re: That was science Amaranth Rose 10/2 03:21 (4)
- Re: That was[n't] science bobbapink 31/1 13:22 (7)
- Re: That was[n't] science Shasta 14/2 19:14 (0)
- Re: That was[n't] science mara 08/2 11:39 (5)
- Re: That was science DA Morgan 30/1 15:19 (2)
- Re: That was meaningless but it made him feel good Dale 31/1 11:07 (1)
- Re: That was meaningless but it made him feel good Shasta 14/2 19:24 (0)
- Re: Yeap John W 30/1 14:51 (0)
Post a Followup