wallsofsilence.com

Childhood trauma and its consequences
It is currently Thu Oct 17, 2019 8:42 pm

All times are UTC + 1 hour [ DST ]




Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 24 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Primal Workshops
PostPosted: Wed Jan 11, 2006 6:10 pm 
Feeling and Body Oriented Depth Psychotherapy Workshop

Lecture and One Week Intensive Training Group
with Paul Vereshack, B.A., M.D., D.Psych.
Ireland 2006

*********************************
Due to the success of the previous workshop held in Glencree in April 2005,
Dr. Paul Vereshack has agreed to give another workshop April 28 2006

See comments from Participants of Irish Workshop 2005. http://www.paulvereshack.com/irishworkshop.htm

What exactly are the underpinnings of a Feeling and Body Oriented Depth Psychotherapy practice? How do we create, "The Wide Open Field of Permission" that is so necessary for this work? What exactly does the therapist do and why and how does he do it?
Dr. Paul Vereshack, B.A.,M.D.,D.Psych. is a Canadian Depth Therapy practitioner of forty years experience and the author of the book, "The Psychotherapy of The Deepest Self," which is fully available on his web site as, "Help Me - I'm Tired of Feeling Bad."
This kind of work, sometimes referred to as Primal Therapy, is often misunderstood. Paul suggests that before attending the free public evening lecture it would be helpful to read his on line book here, and this is a prerequisite for attending the Intensive teaching group mentioned below.
In the free evening lecture during the first hour he will describe his view of the mind/body processes which lie at the heart of this practice. In the second hour he will talk in detail about what exactly he does in helping clients to achieve very deep work on themselves. The third hour will be fully devoted to demonstrations, questions and discussions about what has been put forward.
Following the lecture there will be an eight day Intensive training course. This will be done in a small group, limited to 12 participants. We will work for six hours a day, using each other as subjects to experience first hand the issues connected with this, or any other very deep psychotherapy.
Complete information about Dr. Vereshack and his teaching methods is available here on his web site, as is an entire book of instructions, a brief biography of his life and very much more. The web site also contains comments from the participants in his 2003 Australian, and the 2005 Irish, intensive training groups, together with his most recent workshop held in Toronto, http://www.paulvereshack.com/torontoworkshop.htm October 2005. Please read the Training section of the website for an understanding of how these workshops are conducted.
This course, because we will use ourselves as subjects for demonstrating depth therapy principles, requires that if necessary, each person be prepared to handle in themselves sometimes very high levels of psychological tension. Participants must be able to contain, and where they wish, to process powerful feelings. We make every effort to create a safe environment using modern group and depth therapy principles. No one is ever pressured to take part in processing feelings on the mat although it may be suggested. None the less these groups can cause powerful feelings to arise, and anyone attending is expected to understand that this is a teaching program and not a treatment facility. Previous therapy experience as a client is expected, as is an understanding of very deep therapy methods and procedures as outlined in the above mentioned book.

Dates: Friday Evening 28th April 2006 Free lecture.

Workshop Sat 29th April ? Sat 6th May, 2006

Venue: Glencree Centre for Reconciliation, Enniskerry, Co. Wicklow, Ireland. http://www.glencree.ie/

Cost: ?650. (includes tea/coffee etc., ) but full accommodation and meals at reasonabale rates are available at Glencree, ( see below for contact)

Deposit of ?325 (non-refundable) is payable upon application.
The balance is due March 15, 2006.

Contact: Clare Gill. Tel. 00353-1- 2828948. Email: cgill@eircom.net
For details of accommodation, etc.

Early booking is advisable, as a waiting list is currently being drawn up.
The workshops will conclude with a celebration meal on the Saturday evening.

Dr. Vereshack may be contacted if you need further help.
Email: emotionalsupport@paulvereshack.com
Phone: Canada 416-606-3117 (office/mobile) or 416-686-4481 (home)


Report this post
Top
  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 12, 2006 4:00 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2005 2:06 am
Posts: 486
Location: Sweden
How generous that tea or coffee is included in those 650 Euros. If I understand it well, this is not a treatment but a training course for therapists. So if someone doesn't benefit from the treatment, they can say: hey, it's not treatment but training. And when they have paid that much money, they probably are eager to adapt to the course material and get a good result for the teacher.

Does Paul still believe people have no free will?

Dennis


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jan 14, 2006 1:11 am 
Dennis, I didn't realize you wanted to discourage people from placing announcements about workshops on your forum.

* Mojo *


Report this post
Top
  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 15, 2006 11:48 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2005 2:06 am
Posts: 486
Location: Sweden
Foremost I like to see a more critical attitude towards different kinds of therapies and workshops. A number of years ago I wrote some critical comments on John Speyrer's site (May 1998) on Vereshack's writings that no one replied to (except for Ron of course, who agreed with Vereshack's subatomair universal cure. These were the exact words I wrote then:

You have the megalomanian Dr. Vereshack who plugs his book as a 'major turning point for the human race' and wishes to personally come up with the 'ultimate directive of development for humankind'. Though he claims that psychosis is rooted in genetics and/or a brain chemistry disorder, he contradicts it at the same time saying you can treat it with anti-psychotic medication. He talks about the feeling man but sees people 'without a free will' and 'basically chemistry'. It is sad that his statement: 'If you follow thought and feeling deeply enough you come to brain chemistry and if you follow brain chemistry deeply enough you come to subatomic particles and if you follow subatomic particles deeply enough you come closer to the ground of the creative force of the universe', doesn't make anyone see the absolute nonsense that is described here. Is he actually familiar with the books of Alice Miller? Since he's so enthusiastic about the work of Dr. Aletha J. Solter I wonder what his opinion is about the work of Dr. Miller.

I don't like to see therapy being kept to the elite who can afford it. If someone sincerely wants to help people there are better ways.

Dennis


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Primal Workshops
PostPosted: Tue Jan 17, 2006 10:14 am 
'If you follow thought and feeling deeply enough you come to brain chemistry and if you follow brain chemistry deeply enough you come to subatomic particles and if you follow subatomic particles deeply enough you come closer to the ground of the creative force of the universe', doesn't make anyone see the absolute nonsense that is described here."

Dennis, Ah Dennis. Paul Vereshack is speaking out of experience and obviously his words are making no sense to you. But for those of us, who have experienced this ground; this place of the creative force of the universe as a result of many years of primalling, his statements resonate with a quantum melody that is 'beyond words'. This is the Absolute. Dont give up.

Guest


Report this post
Top
  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jan 24, 2006 10:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 7:49 pm
Posts: 14
Thanks for the post, Clare.

Chucky


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Primal Workshops
PostPosted: Wed Jan 25, 2006 10:24 am 
You are welcome Chucky,

Clare


Report this post
Top
  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 23, 2006 10:10 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 9:33 pm
Posts: 14
To Dennis (and all),

Dennis -- You really seem to have it in for Paul V.!!

I'm not here to defend Paul, but I will try and provide some clarification from what I know about Paul and his work.

As far as I know Paul's workshops are designed to be "teaching" workshops and he has never claimed otherwise. He does state that participants often have the opportunity to do personal deep-emotion work; however, it is not the goal of the workshop and should not be expected.

You say that PV says his books are a "major turning point for the human race". Where does he say this? It sounds out of character for Paul.

You say that PV says that he wishes to come up with the "ultimate directive of development for humankind". Once again, could you provide the reference as to where PV states this?

You say that PV contradicts himself when he talks about psychosis being rooted in brain chemistry and then saying that it can be treated with drugs. I do not understand how this is contradictory. If the problem is rooted in a brain chemistry disorder then it makes perfect sense to me that it can be treated with drugs (i.e. treat a chemistry problem with chemistry).

Linda S.


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 23, 2006 11:50 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2005 2:06 am
Posts: 486
Location: Sweden
Linda,

Besides reading his book Help Me, I'm Tired of Feeling Bad, most come from an interview John Speyrer had at the time with Paul V. You can read it here.

Some excerpts from it:

Quote:
So, to tell you the truth, John, I expect this book to be very very significant - I sound a bit meglomanic, trying to offer a way of raising the consciousness of our species over many years, as people begin to use it. I want to see the book out there. I want people to give it a careful try if they have no one to help them. I have very strong feelings about wanting this to be a major turning point for the human race, in that, just as Freud put dreams in our heads a hundred years ago, I think this book can put feeling skills in our heads now, today, and for the next century, Let people try the book, and with professional help if possible.

---

Anyone who really perfects any kind of doing or skill, knows that at some point they have to let go, get out of their own way, and enjoy the fact that their mind will function. It will always function for them. And so if I was going to suggest any ultimate directive of development for humankind it would be let go and get out of your own way. Please note: This is not a license for undisciplined behavior.

---

I hate to say this because it stirs up tremendous anger in people, but I do not believe in free will. I see the human being as an unfolding flower, only we are unfolding along psychological lines. The central nervous system conducts very rapid brain scans below the level of consciousness. I really feel that the brain scans millions of bytes of information under any given circumstances and comes to a conclusion. There is, I think, a huge psycho-biological trick of nature which gives us the feeling that we are making a choice. In fact, in my opinion, what we are really doing under all circumstances is responding to this rapid scan of our entire memory inventory and our current situation. The brain then gives us a read out which we feel to be a choice, as we put it into action.


You can't treat a genetic cause with medication. Then there's the illusion of the chemical imbalance. The best book I've read that levels that theory with a sledgehammer is Peter Breggin's Toxic Psychiatry. Highly recommended.

About the free will... Is it possible Paul's own free will was broken when he was a small child, similar to the child rearing methods Alice Miller described in her For Your Own Good? Since Paul is one of the elderly among us, it's plausible. Some people don't seem to have a free will, but that doesn't mean men in general don't have it. You can break someone's will, after all.

All I did is asking a few questions and some people start to defend Paul without questioning, without having a discussion. I believe therapists are surrogates for parents and the way people protect their parents, is similar to the way they protect the therapist. Thou Shall Not Know.

Dennis


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Linda Smith
PostPosted: Fri Feb 24, 2006 9:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 9:33 pm
Posts: 14
Thanks, Dennis, for providing this clarification. I've read everything at Paul's website at least two or three times so I'm not going to read it again.

However, I think, for the most part, you are either quoting out of context or misquoting.

You said that "....Dr. Vereshack who plugs his book as a 'major turning point for the human race". The actual quote from Paul V. is "I have very strong feelings about wanting this to be a major turning point for the human race". To me these two things are quite different. In the first case it makes Paul sound quite egotistical. However, I do not believe this to be the case. In my opinion, what Paul was saying is that deep-emtion healing work could be a turning point for humanity if it was embraced by society.

You said that "...and wishes to personally come up with the 'ultimate directive of development for humankind". The actual quote from Paul V. is "And so if I was going to suggest any ultimate directive of development for humankind it would be let go and get out of your own way". Again, to me, these two things are quite different. Once again the first one sounds quite egotistical while the second one does not.

As far as the question of free will goes, I personally believe that we do have free will. However, I don't find any fault with Paul's conclusions either. I wouldn't be surprised if on a larger scale we end up finding out that the entire universe is based on math -- and presumably if I could understand the mathematical makeup of myself and the various mathematical equations/relationships, etc., then all of my actions would be perfectly predictable. To me, these greater philisophical issues are not one or the other -- i.e. someone has to be right and someone else wrong. It's like looking at an elephant -- perhaps we are each just describing different aspects of the elephant.

Linda S.


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Feb 26, 2006 3:11 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2005 2:06 am
Posts: 486
Location: Sweden
This interview was on John Speyrer's website by the way and it looks that you didn't read it. Now I have no problem with different interpretations, but when it comes to language, things are pretty clear. Paul is talking about his own book and not deep emotional healing work in general. Again, the quote:

Quote:
So, to tell you the truth, John, I expect this book to be very very significant - I sound a bit meglomanic, trying to offer a way of raising the consciousness of our species over many years, as people begin to use it. I want to see the book out there. I want people to give it a careful try if they have no one to help them. I have very strong feelings about wanting this to be a major turning point for the human race, in that, just as Freud put dreams in our heads a hundred years ago, I think this book can put feeling skills in our heads now, today, and for the next century, Let people try the book, and with professional help if possible.


Regarding the 'ultimate directive', it's him who suggests that, no one else in the interview.

Once you have a certain view of someone, it's seldom going to change by arguments or facts. It's not unusual that people will interpret information, that has a negative influence on their view, as something positive. That has probably a direct link to the influence of parents who taught the child to be positive about hurtful experiences.

You cannot both believe in a free will and not to believe in a free will. You can't, for example, both believe in a flat earth and a round one. If you believe in contradictory truths, could that be because of a childhood full of conflicting truths?

Dennis


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Feb 28, 2006 10:40 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 9:33 pm
Posts: 14
To Dennis,

First of all, let me retract my statement that you misquoted Paul. When I read it the first time I thought that you had changed Paul?s words, but I see that the portion that you placed in quotation marks is an exact quote.

Secondly, let me address what comes across as personal attacks:

1) You accuse me of not having read the interview. What is the intent of this statement? Is the purpose to make the reader reach the conclusion that anyone who had read the interview couldn?t possibly reach such an erroneous conclusion? If so, this comes across as a rather childish technique for arguing one?s point. I assure you I have read (a number of times) the full interview as well as the piece you quoted.

2) You state that I am unlikely to change my opinion of someone (i.e. from positive to negative) by listening to the facts. You do not know me and as such it would probably be best if you left such personal judgments out of the picture. I have no problem in going back and re-examining my own thought process and/or looking at new evidence and changing my opinion on that basis.

3) You go on to further suggest that perhaps my interpretation is the result of childhood issues. We all have childhood issues; however, it serves no purpose here (other than to attempt to falsely bolster your side of the argument) for you to attempt to analyze my childhood. If we are discussing facts then let?s stick to the facts and leave personal judgments out of the equation.

Now, lets move on to a discussion of the facts.

You say that ?when it comes to language, things are pretty clear?. To me, language is anything but clear for a number of reasons:
1) We all process language through our own personal filters.
2) Word meanings change over time, so it is not an exact science ? how can something be a precise science when the meanings are continually changing (and there is no universal agreement at any point in time as to exactly what the meaning of any individual word is).
3) Language is imprecise at its best (i.e. perfect use of grammar, punctuation, etc.). If language is not precise at its best, and most people are not particularly skilled when it comes to proper grammar usage, then language can become quite a blunt tool for communication.
4) None of us is perfect in picking the exact right words at all times to convey the message that we wish to convey ? therefore it is often easy to pick apart someone else?s message (and give it an unintended twist) if we choose to intentionally do so.

We can easily change the meaning of a statement by changing so much as one single word or by putting a certain emphasis or tone to it; it?s not difficult to give something a certain twist that wasn?t meant to be there by the author.

Although Paul is talking about his book in the paragraph that you quote, his book is about ?deep emotional healing?. It is this ?deep emotional healing? that can be the turning point for humanity ? and perhaps Paul?s book being the impetus for this to start taking place. Regardless of how you read that particular paragraph, I still say that you?ve put a certain twist on it by saying that ?You have the megalomanian Dr. Vereshack who plugs his book as a major turning point for the human race?. To me it makes Paul sound much more egotistical to say that he is touting his book as ?thee? (my word) major turning point for the human race as opposed to saying that he would like for this to be a major turning point for the human race or even that this could be a major turning point for the human race. To me the first one says: ?Look at me I?m so great and my book is so great and I?m so brilliant, etc. etc.? The second one says: ?I believe I may have stumbled onto something here that could be a turning point for the human race?. (okay, okay ? I realize I am exaggerating the difference here ? but I?m doing this to demonstrate the point that we can make things sound the way we want them to sound by making subtle changes). In my opinion, we should aim, to the best of our ability, to interpret the message in the way that it was intended by the author.

This post is getting too long so I am not going to give an example of how I think you?ve changed the meaning of Paul?s intention with his comment on the ?ultimate directive?, but the same principle applies, I think you have changed his intended meaning by applying subtle twists and turns in how you presented it.

As far as your statement around the concept of free will ? that I can?t have it both ways (i.e. to believe it both does and doesn?t exist). I don?t see things as this cut and dry ? black and white. It depends on how you look at it ? from where and what perspective. Light can be both/either a wave or a particle. If someone had only ever seen light as a particle then they wouldn?t believe that it could also be a wave; they would think that it is an ?either/or? situation when in actuality it is a ?both/and?. It doesn?t always have to be ?either/or?; it can both ?both/and/either? (depending on the circumstances; depending on how you look at it). Take a look at the field of quantum physics and you will find lots of examples of this ? a single particle can exist in two places at the same time. I don?t like to come to hasty judgments about other people?s beliefs simply because they do not agree with my beliefs or even because they do not agree with generally-accepted beliefs. I think we need to leave a little breathing room here for people to think outside of the box.

In summary, in my opinion, you are reading something more into Paul?s literature than what is actually there and intentionally giving it an egotistical twist in your presentation of it.

Linda S.


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 01, 2006 1:48 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2005 2:06 am
Posts: 486
Location: Sweden
What I meant was that written language is pretty clear. If I write, for example: The book lies on the table. Then a person in Utah, Mexico or France knows that the book lies on the table and not under the table or on the fridge. Why you refer to quantum physics is a mystery to me. Does that mean that the book lies as well on as under the table at the same time?

I didn’t accuse you of anything. You replied by saying you had read everything on Paul’s Website. If you had clicked on the link and read it, you would have seen it was on John Speyrer’s site so I concluded my observation (not accusation) that you hadn’t read it. Now to me it seems you go in quite some effort to defend Paul again and defend yourself (by calling it personal attacks).

Quote:
Once you have a certain view of someone, it's seldom going to change by arguments or facts. It's not unusual that people will interpret information that has a negative influence on their view, as something positive. That has probably a direct link to the influence of parents who taught the child to be positive about hurtful experiences.


I wrote this with Primal Theory in mind. You can acknowledge that or you can deny it with arguments. You simply state that your childhood may or may not be relevant and any comment on it is interpreted as a ‘judgemental attack’. Again, why the strong reaction? This forum is about childhood and the effects of it on adult life.

How can you discuss human behavior without making it personal? It’s not an exact science. This forum is about written language and it may have limits, language is still the best way to communicate.

Dennis


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 01, 2006 5:05 pm 
Just for a taste of breadth and depth of the free will discussion (about which entire books have been written), I'd recommend the Wikipedia article on the subject:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_will

Shelly


Report this post
Top
  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Mar 02, 2006 1:54 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 9:33 pm
Posts: 14
Hi Shelley,

Thanks for providing this link on the subject of free will. I took a quick a look at it and it looks quite interesting. I plan on reading it more thoroughly when I get the chance.

Linda S.


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 24 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC + 1 hour [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group