‘God, I have a problem’
I might say that – and often do - as an expression of temporary anguish. A communication that is more important to give than to receive. Or it could be a prayer. An intimate communication to an unknowable other. – yet expecting a response, a reaction of some kind.
Internet communication can be talking into the ether, not expecting a response, but I am realising more these days how it may carry an emotional message, and the usual rules of transference and counter transference apply. I used to think that emails, being autistic, get misunderstood because they are flat, and lacking depth or perspective – but the misunderstood email is, I now realise, also very much a product of projective identification.
Young people carry out their complex courtship and mating routines by texting. We are all getting used to living and working in virtual communities. I am not talking about YouTube or Second Life. There is a web hub, where Tavistock Institute social scientists and consultants are learning to talk together in a new space for them. There are experiments in internet-based group relations conferences. It all has a West Coast feel about it, which reminds this old hippy of the ‘60’s and 70s. . And indeed I see a San Francisco group have successfully developed a Buddhist sangha.
I wonder if we could learn from people who pray. I understand that people often have an informal communication with God. And I remember I have heard in particular Jewish stories full of humour about such communications.
What happens when we talk to others as if we are talking to ourselves? Or talk to ourselves, content that others may overhear. These are closed system communications in an open systems framework.
God, this is confusing. (You can decide for yourself if this is a comment or a prayer.)
I might say that – and often do - as an expression of temporary anguish. A communication that is more important to give than to receive. Or it could be a prayer. An intimate communication to an unknowable other. – yet expecting a response, a reaction of some kind.
Internet communication can be talking into the ether, not expecting a response, but I am realising more these days how it may carry an emotional message, and the usual rules of transference and counter transference apply. I used to think that emails, being autistic, get misunderstood because they are flat, and lacking depth or perspective – but the misunderstood email is, I now realise, also very much a product of projective identification.
Young people carry out their complex courtship and mating routines by texting. We are all getting used to living and working in virtual communities. I am not talking about YouTube or Second Life. There is a web hub, where Tavistock Institute social scientists and consultants are learning to talk together in a new space for them. There are experiments in internet-based group relations conferences. It all has a West Coast feel about it, which reminds this old hippy of the ‘60’s and 70s. . And indeed I see a San Francisco group have successfully developed a Buddhist sangha.
I wonder if we could learn from people who pray. I understand that people often have an informal communication with God. And I remember I have heard in particular Jewish stories full of humour about such communications.
What happens when we talk to others as if we are talking to ourselves? Or talk to ourselves, content that others may overhear. These are closed system communications in an open systems framework.
God, this is confusing. (You can decide for yourself if this is a comment or a prayer.)
posted by Tim at 12:54 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home