how should we lay persons view this ?.
it's true that if you look under "passive-aggressive personality disorder" (papd) in the diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (the older editions--more about that below), you find the syndrome solemnly described as a "pervasive pattern of passive resistance to demands for adequate social and occupational performance.
" but once you delve into the history of the term, you realize that--at least in the eyes of its critics--it's mostly useful as a high-flown way to call someone a pain in the ass.
It's important to me whether or not it is disorder so a to dispel any notion for some of the points
mentioned in the article I quoted... why for example would you try to overcome or curb a normal
non-aggressive human reaction to a potential anger inducing situation.. ?
Caliber
how should we lay persons view this ?.
it's true that if you look under "passive-aggressive personality disorder" (papd) in the diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (the older editions--more about that below), you find the syndrome solemnly described as a "pervasive pattern of passive resistance to demands for adequate social and occupational performance.
" but once you delve into the history of the term, you realize that--at least in the eyes of its critics--it's mostly useful as a high-flown way to call someone a pain in the ass.
How should we lay persons view this ?
It's true that if you look under "passive-aggressive personality disorder" (PAPD) in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (the older editions--more about that below), you find the syndrome solemnly described as a "pervasive pattern of passive resistance to demands for adequate social and occupational performance." But once you delve into the history of the term, you realize that--at least in the eyes of its critics--it's mostly useful as a high-flown way to call someone a pain in the ass.
Recognizing that the definition as then formulated wasn't working but uncertain how to fix it, the compilers of DSM-IV (1994) dumped PAPD from the list of official disorders and relegated it to an appendix. The most telling complaint, while avoiding confrontation. It's only pathological if it's a habitual, crippling response reflecting a pervasively pessimistic attitude--people who suffer from PAPD expect disappointment, and gain a sense of control over their lives by bringing it about. Some psychiatrists have suggested that PAPD be merged into a broader category, called negativistic personality disorder. Diagnostic criteria: passive-aggressive plus (a) mad at the world, (b) envious and resentful, (c) feels cheated by life, and (d) alternately hostile and clingy.
The term "passive-aggressive" was introduced in a 1945 U.S. War Department technical bulletin, describing soldiers who weren't openly insubordinate but shirked duty through procrastination, willful incompetence, and so on. If you've ever served in the military during wartime, though, or for that matter read Catch-22, you realize that what the brass calls a personality disorder a grunt might call a rational strategy to avoid getting killed.
This is an on-line opinion about passive-aggressive... what are your thoughts or reaction.. I personally agree that it is way too easy
to label people !
Cal
quote from rutherford book enemies:.
"satan is a spirit creature, therefore invisible to human eyes; and also angels are spirit creatures and invisible to human eyes" (p.34).
in bible scriptures, "angels" have made appearances to humans.
Witchettygrub: "It (WT) says the angels materialized or 'put on' a body like our own."
Does WT have an explanation for HOW they were able to transform?
Did they have to drink blood to become human; after all, the life is in the blood.
Do you think that's why people had to give so many blood sacrifices? Maybe the angels were drinking the blood so they could transform?
Life is in the blood simply means that if you drain the blood life is gone.. just a Doctors consider you dead when there's no
brain activity (Brain dead) according to most..... means no life..... no life without brain activity. Too literal a rending of any statement
is dangerous and misleading . Poetic and symbolic metaphors are part of language not just matter of fact statements !
There is no mention of them being gigantic or having wings
On angels having wings, see: Exodus 25:20, 1 Kings 8:6-8, Psalm 18:10, Isaiah 6:20, Ezekiel 1:5-11, 23-25, 10:5, 8, 12, 16, 19. Angels are often depicted as flying, cf. Revelation 14:6.
If wings are always seen a literal rather than representing some sort of divine approval or figurative meaning.. does that mean
that those with crowns in heaven is also to be taken literal not Representative of something else such a power or rulership ?
Caliber
In a controversy the instant we feel anger we have already ceased striving for the truth, and have begun striving for ourselves.
Cal
Should women be allowed to have 14 kids without job?
To me this question ( to bring it to greater light) is like asking ....
Should this women be allowed to walk around outside in 40 below winter weather without a winter jacket on ?
Yes she has the right as long as she is considered of sound mind otherwise no one has the RIGHT to stop her .
Would I personally try to justify her actions ? no Would I condemn those who try to give a common sense response
to her actions ? no.... but I guess thats just me !!!!!
Cal
In a free society the laws are here to protect even those who make foolish decisions.
Aint freedom grand ????? No one has the right to make you use your common sense .
Like the song says "Well that's my story and I'm sticking to it ! " ......... .... Cal
how many atheists are there who don't believe that they came from fish ?.
the outspoken ones that i have come into contact with always seem to (when pressed anyway) advocate such a thing.
many of them surely even put something like it on their car, such as:.
Speaking words of wisdom..." Let it be "...... there will be an answer
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j9SgDoypXcI
Cal
how many atheists are there who don't believe that they came from fish ?.
the outspoken ones that i have come into contact with always seem to (when pressed anyway) advocate such a thing.
many of them surely even put something like it on their car, such as:.
My body may be descended from a chain of ancestors that at one point in time were fish, but I believe that the chain of evolution has its origin in God the source of all being at the beginning of time.
And I also believe that my spirit/soul that animates my body comes from God directly.
BTS
I think the above quote is a perfect place to end this debate allow place for scientific research yet Christan's if they so
choose or faith in such can still leave a place for God in this... . Evolutionist need not look to a step two (spirit/soul )
if they so choose or are convinced to believe otherwise ! May peace and fellow understanding always prevail !
Caliber
six human needs.
1. a need for certainty.
2. need for variety.
Six Human Needs
1. A need for Certainty
2. Need for variety
3. Need to feel significant
4. Need for connection and love
5. Need for growth
6. Need to contribute
(4) love will give you confidence and the inspiration to attain all other
things on the list . Heartfelt Love can never replace absolute certainty
but in my opinion it's a damned close second !!!!
Caliber
six human needs.
1. a need for certainty.
2. need for variety.
Allow all their own journey.... this too will in turn give you peace
absolutism--extremism--dogmatism to be replaced by acceptance--balance--understanding --compassion
comfort and support your fellowman always !
A dog is not considered a good dog because he is a good barker. A man is not considered a good man because he is a good talker.
Buddha
