Created  Jan. 1, 2012       uploaded May 22, 2012              updated Oct 14, 2014

Janov in Action

The Premise
From Janov's Blog
Intellectuality    Jun 6, 2013
Intellect 4 Nothing   Mar 26 014
Against Religion
On Science, Suppression
This Just In!  - Murder and the Intellect
It is Simple
The Science of PT
The Hidden Observer       Nov 20, 013
Other Practitioners
Total Healing or Nothing
On Loving Yourself        
Repression Kills          
Psychotherapy a Cult?     Jan. 3, 2013
The Most Important Aspect       Jun 24, 2013
You Think You Feel, But You Don't       Apr 1 014
The Whole Truth and Nothing But        Apr 20 014
"More on Levels of Consciousness"    Oct 14 014
The Meaning of Life?     Jan 12 015
The Meaning of Life Revised    Feb 27 015

Related Articles

The Premise
Back to Top

At this point of time (May 22, 2012), I have uploaded this article unfinished, with the plan of updating it often. So it does not have the polished finished look and probably never will.

This is written for psychology fans, students, and practitioners, as much as for religious people I would like to attract to psychology to be used in behalf of God and man. Not psychology as it is openly publicly taught and promoted, but as it truly exists and is yet to be fully proven or openly admitted. This Real psychology is one we must deduce for ourselves from scratch, though many psychologists over the years have contributed to in helpful ways.

In this article, I point out the shortcomings, as I see them, based on what is written by Arthur Janov and his fans, primarily, as well as a few critics like myself, on Janov's Blog site, also now addressed on the net as These posts on this blog show what they believe, in their own words, and my comments added, of course. It is the best way to show what they really believe and how they conduct themselves.

I am not an enemy of Janov, by any means. What he has discovered is very real. His practice and theory are simply not complete, as I see it. What is more, Art is quite the spin doctor and can really twist something and he has some hangups and vulnerabilities. He leaves me with some doubts and concerns.

First, though he claims to be the discoverer of Primal Pain and Primal Theory/Therapy, he is not truly the 1st discoverer. But you would only know this if your research had been very extensive and you happen to investigate the forbidden conspiracy circles where you find out these principles of Janov's theory and practice have long been known and understood in clandestine circles of governments and researchers for at least 200 years. Janov was the 1st to openly publicly bring it out and publish on it and use it for good purposes, exclusively, we assume.

But again, he has not perfected it and he leaves me with more than a few doubts, based on his conduct and words. But to say what I have in this Premise, I need supporting evidence which follows next under various topics from his Blog Site.

From Janov's Blog
Back to Top

>> Janov reveals himself here perhaps better than any other place. This is raw Janov in action. <<

Anonymous    Jan 31, 2012 08:20 PM
I just discovered your web site a few months ago and now your blog. I was introduced to all this work by first reading Fritz Perls "Gestalt therapy" from 1953, which lead me somehow to Alice Miller's work on trauma and then Konrad Stettbachers 4 step program.
I guess I am what you call a "self-primer" and had a lot of other new age stuff in the past to get me ready for this.
I seem to be doing fairly well and at a pace that allows me continuous breakthru's with a healthy respect for my defense mechanisms. That is, I am trying not to push anything that feels harmful. I am simply finally letting the pain emerge.
What do you think of Stettbacher's work?
Arthur Janov    Feb 2, 2012 05:01 AM
Anthro: It is amazing to me that people want to cash in on the notion of Primal Therapy, or using my name. If they are really onto something new why not use their own name or some other name? They just want to take advantage of my 40 years of work, where they do not have to put out any effort. It is dishonest and Stettbacher is one of them. Let us not confuse me with the charlatans, the copiers and plagiarists. We do science and I have no idea why any of them do; one thing for sure they do not do serious therapy nor scientific therapy in any way.

Be careful of those who cash in. They are poseurs who harm people. Years ago we looked into a lot of professionals who use my name or the name Primal; not one did it carefully and properly. If people want to do our therapy we have had training for many years. Why don't they train and do it right? They are harming people and should not be allowed to practice in my name. The only recourse we have is to forewarn others, about how the therapy should be practiced, and then it is up to them. They either decide to do it right or not; it is their lives. I have not seen a single scientific work on the part of the poseurs. They are in business not in the practice of the healing art.

>> I have another article referring to others who promote PT or PT like therapies. They may not do "scientific work" to prove PT, but what good has it done Art to do so? When they practice their own PT, they are learning new things and using them. They should publish these findings but it does not mean they do not have any by not publishing. Art says he only practices and is not in it for business or money. I seriously doubt that. <<

Arthur Janov    Feb 2, 2012 02:13 AM
An email comment: "Dear Dr. Janov,

I have ONE main question....
If one's environment is ideal and one has no obligations and can be 'relaxed' in supportive surroundings...does the body have the ability to release these old suppressed traumas and memories automatically by ITSELF...WITHOUT doing anything actively to enhance it?
In the event of you answering this question negatively, how will you substantiate it...since the body has such an innate intelligence?

Why do I ask this? Because I'm going through the weirdest of physical symptoms which can disappear in one day or after a week without doing ANYTHING about it. By the way I'm on NO medication at all. AND, I find I'm dreaming my past experiences so vividly.
Kind regards."
  1. And my answer:
    I think that emotional pain is always surging toward connection only to be met by gating. So if there truly is not current stress at all and the body can take it, then yes it is possible that feelings are generated spontaneously. You defense system is allowing it, which is rarely the case. art
Jim RMJan 22, 2012 01:00 PM

.  .  .  .  So, let’s ask a question. In the field of human behavior what elegant theory, if any, has science uncovered which explains at the macro scale - human behavior such as repression, anger, love, nurture, psychosis, etc. and at the same time explains what is happening at different biological levels in the reptile, mammal, and primate regions of the human brain?
What theory of human behavior has science uncovered which at the same time also explains what is happening at the molecular level- imipramine binding, cortisol, and possibly the gene level?

So far no theory comes close to opening wide the doors of understanding to all of these levels human behavior except Primal Theory. Primal theory alone has proven to be the profoundly robust theory within the broad spectrum of human behavior. Primal theory alone has reversed a spectrum of powerfully developed neuroses at the behavior level. At the microscopic scale, primal theory has reversed a spectrum of lifelong systemic vital signs such as temperature, blood pressure, pulse, and metabolism at the molecular level.

So a robust Primal Theory as pioneered, developed, and practiced by Art Janov, is the first place to look for a possible theoretical breakthrough that will undo molecular changes at the epigenetic level.

Back to Top

>> Posters on this Post felt alienation due to their outlook and feelings, both with and without Primal Therapy. It is not exclusive to fans of Primal Therapy, either. Philosophers and religious pioneers often feel it. Anyone who brakes away from the common world is apt to experience it.

These posts are all from the following: <<

Thursday, December 29, 2011
On the Right and Left Brain. There Is No Cure Without Their Unity. (Part 3/10)

Anonymous said...

Hello Art (and fellow primal-ers),

Thanks for your continued writings and also thanks to those of you who leave comments here. I find support in them after having my whole being turned upside-down (for the better!) by primal therapy. It has been difficult to keep hold of myself in the social sphere I live in and the words here have become my special little corner of reality that speaks honestly to me in a confusing world.

One thing I was wondering (and the Holiday season has really accentuated this): Does anybody else here find that primal therapy has been a mixed blessing? Does anybody find that it has changed them so profoundly that they find themselves alienated from and nearly unable to connect meaningfully with their social world? I feel that the closer I get to being my real self, the further I get away from my friends and family. I find that being around them is less and less enjoyable due to this lack of connection, in some cases to the point where I feel it may even be harmful for me to spend too much time with them. I catch myself despairing in my failed efforts to connect to them the way I wish to and at times have unconsciously fallen into my old patterns of playing the "when in Rome" game. And then I regret it later because I feel I have sold out my truer instincts, not to mention going too far into boozing it up with them. It's almost like I am at a crossroads of sorts. My social world is large and vibrant-- there are many opportunities to meet new people and it has come to mean a lot to me. I am loathe to abandon it, even partially. More distressing still, this "stranger in a strange land" dilemma manifests itself similarly within the few romantic possibilities that come my way.

Does anybody else contend with this?
December 30, 2011 2:06 PM

Anonymous said...

Art said “The Primal Scream was a right brain piece, full of feeling. It took decades until I could use the left side to embellish my work and include serious science into it. I think now both sides are equal and work in harmony. Not easy. I could finally develop the left side because I got rid of all that garbage that was infiltrating into it from the right. As long as the right was overloaded there could be no harmony. The right had a terrible burden, and needed help. I discovered the help and gave it to myself. I invented, rather discovered, a therapy and could finally could make a marriage of the two sides and they get along famously. I can get to sleep easily because I can cede the left side to the right and get below the constant rumination and nightmares. And I can concentrate very well indeed. Apart from the damage surgeons did on my throat I am in perfect health; all systems working fine. I don’t think that is an accident. I use my case in order to illustrate all this for others.

Art, I loved this article and never want you to stop writing, ever, but perhaps I am asking too much? Still, I am fascinated by the above article and in particular the words I have quoted here. It has left me with a feeling I am having trouble feeling. I guess I am trying to ask you a question which has been asked before on this forum; that is will you ever let us know how you gave yourself this help, how you gave yourself Primal therapy. Perhaps a dangerous question as many might want to try and replicate your method and give the therapy to themselves. So I will understand if you refuse but I’d love to know. Perhaps your biographer will enlighten us?

I ask in all honesty and wish you, France and David and the rest of your team the very best for the year ahead and look forward to reading more of your posts.            Regards, Steve
December 31, 2011 5:17 AM

Anonymous, I experienced what you describe, pretty intensely, for the first couple years after I discovered Primal now 20 years ago. (Please note, I'm still yet to actually receive the therapy). I looked at *everything* (and I mean everything) thru Primal-tinted glasses.. It deeply affected all aspects of my life, yes my connections w/people, and my choices. Then somehow it led me to a place of being able to see the pain in everyone- taking various forms, we all have it, we are all the same, we are all human. This more compassionate view has led me to if anything connect more deeply w/people, even if that isn't necessarily played out w/them. Hope this helps.
December 31, 2011 10:16 PM

PATRICK said...
I wish that I could have put it so clearly. What you are experiencing is exactly what is happening to me. I find other people so disconnected. I find it difficult to talk to them without feeling "false". So, in order to have some company, I sometimes dance along with what their buzz is.

As for my family, it seems as if I had moved millions of kilometres away from them. They are wary of me, because I am the one that is "strange", you know......I do not attend their happy-clappy churches, and I cannot stand being around them listening to one "naughty wink-wink" joke after another.

Their is no-one else here where I live, with whom I can comfortably socialise, never mind buddying. So what I do I seek out women who seem to be more calm, relaxed and perhaps even somewhat demure. But the craziness soon shows, usually in the form of religious beliefs, or some other esoteric booga booga. It is a case of knowing so much about humans, and ourselves, (having felt so much of our pain), and being able to spot neurosis a long distance away.

Express a feeling and out comes the ideations, or the attempt to rob you of your feeling, i.e. "Oh, you shouldn't feel that way about it.
Have you tried bio-feedback?" or something akin to that. So we tolerate them. It actually pains me to see the total ignorance, the unawareness, the unconsciousness. I want to help and enlighten, but one is up against a solid wall of disconnectedness and left-brain effluence.

On the other hand, I want to say how wonderful it is to be a feeling person and to be able to "lie down and feel it" as France Janov said.
Connecting with deep-down first-line pain is the most satisfying experience (and healing) experience anyone can have.
January 1, 2012 3:51 AM

A comment by planespotter that got erased by mistake:
"Hi Anonymous

I have not had Primal Therapy yet but hope to soon.

I would say that my reading and recovery from a breakdown (I call it my breakthrough) has caused me to feel very much like you do. As I have recovered and got more in touch with my feelings and my true past I have gained far more empathy for other people. I seem to be surrounded by pain in my friends etc. I think it does cause one to feel more cut off from people. I find it hard to be able to say what I wish sometimes because I know it will alienate someone. I think that in some ways it is about learning to be with oneself more. I would say that I was and can still be a very suggestable person so I am easily influenced by others feelings because that is how I was brought up. I had to accept the role and personality I was given by Parents and thus even now if I am not careful I still act as this involuntary sponge and so have broken off contact with some other sick people simply because it did me no good to be around them.
January 1, 2012 2:51 PM

Paul said... Hi,

It is the beginning of the end of your own craziness when you loose your desire and ability to go along with everyone elses' craziness.

We just have to go through the loneliness, it's not possible to circumnavigate that emptiness (unless you can actually construct a new false self, some do). No matter how painful the trek is, we can take pride in being true to who we really are and not playing along as and with a hollow facade.

Everybody fighting off the resonance. Pretending to be shiny rocks, in a brave new world.
Paul G.
January 1, 2012 4:16 PM

>> "To thine own self be true!" and to hell with the rest ;-) When one ventures out beyond the mainstream and popular, isolation will be the natural result. Art would say its your problem, deal with it. I would warn people up front that a heightened awareness, feeling, and knowledge will often leave you feeling alone with few to relate to. The internet helps some, though. Let the Buyer beware.

Just a humorous antidote, but if you are a Simpsons fan, and I am insanely so (and some say just plain insane), you will appreciate the episode where a doctor (either Hibbard or Dr. Nick) finds a crayon that had been driven up Homer's nose and into his brain. They took it out and suddenly the moron was brilliant. But the brilliance cause him to be rejected, isolated, and lonely. His daughter Lisa, also on the fringe and often alone, really like her dad's new personality but Homer did not like it. He left Lisa a note that he had to fix something. He goes to Moe, the bartender and Moe pushes another crayon up Homer's nose and he is back to normal. Lisa is disappointed but understands. It, as most Simpsons episodes are, was delightful, but as is often the case, there was a serious message hidden in there, somewhere. One of these days I'll crack it. If I could just dig that crayon out of my nose ;-) <<

Back to Top

Arthur, you seem to, in my opinion, dismiss the intellect almost as if it was just a decoration or something. My intellect helped me to recognize primal therapy and reject the fear or denial. That is the power of the intellect that you dismiss, seemingly. That at least 99% of the world does not bother with an intellect or examination of life, science, politics, or anything else does not mean it is not useful or not important. Maybe we have even failed evolution that intended that the brain over-ride fear and ponder what is going on inside us, if we would only dare.

Why did the intellect develop? I, for one, am all ears. Let’s hear it. Was it just to round out our heads so that we would look better? What?

October 28, 2010 10:00 PM

Arthur Janov said...

APOLLO I do not dismiss the intellect; but today's therapies are all about intellect and not feeling. I am providing a counterbalance. You cannot convince neurosis away anymore than you can love it away. Feelings are the culprit and the savior. art janov

Arthur, I hear you and I agree. I also believe that true development of the intellect has been largely ignored. Those who propose "reason" therapy are not really tackling it from an analytical-intellectual standpoint.

Deep science is NOT intuitive. Aristotle used common observation and intuition to some degree to try and assemble reasonable logic. But to do Newtonian science whereby you ignore your eyes and sense and trust in what your instruments tell you, and reason from there, is almost counter-intuitive. One needs to make objective deductions based on results.

Those who support "reason" therapy do not look at the facts. They do not acknowledge that reactions in patients do not appear rational. But patients are giving off sings to be observed and pondered. Many findings I have read back in 80s in Psychology Today often had experimental results that supported your theories. They noted how when a person was helped to overcome certain phobias or whatever, that a year or two later, they would develop something else as a result. the problem did not go away, but a particular symptom did. They did not bother to ponder that and find an explanation for the change. Something must have still been there at work inside.

Scientists, so called, tend to ignore a lot of things. It would seem their feelings are interfering with the intellect instead of the intellect bucking and demanding answers that befit genuine sincere logic and reason. I think the "reasoning" therapists could use a little more self examination, which is never an easy thing to do. It is natural to run.

July 28, 2011 posts not posted as best as I can tell (censored - it happens a lot) :

Richard >>feelings make us SMART.

I have not yet actually seen any proof of that and have seen evidence to the contrary. I have seen western thinking, science, law and other such things trampled asunder. I do not know what to make of what I have seen. I have some suspicions, though. But I suppose those drops on my head way back when, might have done more than I thought. Its possible.

AJ >> That is why using that brain to get to the past is an oxymoron.  It cannot be done; talking about the pass won’t get us to feeling.

The left cortex was not meant to get to the buried past. It is meant to analyze and confirm what is present and what is the true state of things by use of evidence and analyzation, weighing and balancing to reach a conclusion that can be objectively agreed to or that tests for a method of reasoning. We need to use the right tools for the right situations.

You keep dancing around the barn, Art. No one is arguing how to get to feelings. But what is the intellect for, if anything? Your promotions seem to promote hatred toward the intellect. But repeated tests show you unwilling to admit anything about the intellect. Who are you really serving, my friend?

If I want to interpret or understand the real external world, and I have not been able to avail myself of PT, then what do I do?

I’ll answer it as you would, sort of >> Well, Feeling is the only way to go so I will not address how to help thinking, otherwise. I would prefer to ignore that vital issue you raise. Sorry.

Me: No problem. I understand perfectly. Silence can say more than words, especially if it is consistent repeated long term silence after many probes. If one can not answer, it is better to be silent so that others will not know you can not answer.

>> Note the witty tactics of the doctor: using that brain to get to the past is an oxymoron.  It cannot be done
How about just using the brain, period! Art frames it by ignoring its use and pointing out that it does not get to the past or the pain. It does not need to. <<

apollo    Jul 18, 2011 11:43 PM
For Jack

Jack says: The world is full of STUDYING institutions (Universities et al) and few if any get to ANY universal understanding of anything about life.

ME: True. But they are all controlled and play by false pretenses. They are not sincere in their stated objectives. It is lies and deceit so do not use these as an example of all “studying.” They do not want universal understandings of life. They want to control life and direct it as they please, disregarding any feeling for other humans.

Are we running ourselves into oblivion or is someone driving us in that direction against our will? And doing so precisely because we do not bother to think and understand what is truly going on around us. We would prefer to stick our heads in the sand and ignore it all and maybe it will just go away.

Again, I note that those who lead and bully us in the world, also would prefer that we not think. You seem to go along with them. Is it merely coincidence or is there a common bond tween you and them? Just asking.

It just seems to me that you might be associating thinking with the world and the world at large does not think. Hence the problem. Only a few souls at the top do the thinking and directing as they please for themselves. they do not care about those they herd.


It kind of seems to me like you are complicating something simple. I may not understand your explanation completely. But to me, many people know full well what they are doing. When they act cruel, they know it hurts. They simply do not care. They like their position of power and enjoy using it. By dumping on you, they get relieved. They feel all better afterward.

We often make excuses for them, but not me. I won’t do it. I know they know. I’d bet my life on it. You can refuse to hurt, just as you can refuse to go to war. It really is just that simple. Those who complicate things with long drawn out explanations are what I call Tom Sawyers. Tom was great for making simple easy situations incredibly complicated, just to make an adventure or something.

Einstein said, there is truth in simplicity. Occam’s razor suggests that the simplest solution is usually the correct one. I live by that. I am willing to die by that.  

Andrew Atkin said...

Apollo: "Einstein said, there is truth in simplicity. Occam’s razor suggests that the simplest solution is usually the correct one. I live by that. I am willing to die by that."

My philosophy is: "Throw away all the bullshit ("golden rule" and "code" etc), and see what there is to see. The truth is what it is - let it be what it is. Don't create an abstract evaluation criteria to determine its validity. Don't put yourself in a philosophical prism.

Don't think I'm being argumentive with you because I'm not - It's just my spin!
December 17, 2011 4:27 PM

apollo          Jul 23, 2011 04:38 PM Well Richard,

I am clearly retarded and it shows, doesn't it? ;-) but if you want me to reject evidence, logic, and reasoning in favor of "feelings," count me out now. Western society, our courts, and science are based upon the solid foundation of evidence since those attempt to discern and separate feelings and prejudices from what is reasonable from an objective point of view. Sorry that seems to escape you, a common problem with those who seem to favor PT. That concerns me significantly.

Arthur Janov        Jul 24, 2011 11:21 AM Apollo: Trust me that has nothing to do with primal. i don't know how that error crept into some readers. art janov  

>> Artie says it is not his fault. Bullshit says I! He is exactly the cause. He says we can not progress in the intellect without primalling first. Has said it many times. but what I said seemed so shameful that he did not want to get painted with the same stroke, even though the paint sticks. <<

Janov's reflections on the Human Condition
What Happened to My High Level Conscious Awareness?
Posted: 03 Nov 2012 09:10 AM PDT

  Sometimes the three levels of consciousness are sitting right before us for all to see.  I read an article today on Alzheimers Disease.  It seems the victim can still do all of the feeling chores:  affection, getting  a new boy or girlfriend, cuddle up to a doll, take walks with a new friend, cry, kiss, pet animals, and so on.  It means that they can lead a feeling life even when they do not know who they are or where they belong.  They can do all this without an effective  (and affective) third line prefrontal cortex.  They are effectively decorticates.  And yet they can love and  feel loved.

  Now look at the higher level professor, with a super functioning neocortex, someone who wrote a book on the PROOF OF HEAVEN.  He is an M.D. and it is recommended reading by a Ph.D.  It is about consciousness after death.  Here the neocortex is used to keep him unconscious.    The blurb for this book is that he is “living proof of an afterlife.”  Or, as I might describe it, ” living proof of nonsense.”  Unless we believe that we can have experience without a functioning brain.

  What it seems to be is last in first out:  the last to develop, our prefrontal cortex is the first to go as we grow  older.    But we can still have a life even when that happens; it is called a feeling  life.  We cannot do math but we can be overjoyed when someone brings us a teddy bear.  We become the child again who does not as yet have a functioning cortex.    Or in the case above,  they can do math but have lost their child in the process.  Choose what you prefer:  an unfeeling mental giant, or a feeling child.  Who is the more alive?  And if you choose the feeling child you won’t have to read books about experiencing the after life.

>> Arthur points out something important to understand. When our cortex functions minimally, the "stem" can keep us going and we sort of still seem human to others. It would take careful study to detect a lack of cortex function. But On the other hand, a functioning cortex is blamed for delusions resulting from what I assume is a "near death experience." Only problem is that the cortex was used by the stem, not the stem being used by the cortex. The cortex (primarily the right side, I suspect) can receive input from the outside through the senses, or it can become largely like a movie screen, putting on a show for the left cortex to watch and make guesses about what took place. Art seems to be suggesting that the cortex actually controlled the stem. I say the cortex is controlled by the stem, which is in most times, in those with lesser development of the cortex, tends to be the case. See my reply to this post below. <<

My replay submitted Sunday night, Nov. 4, 2012, 10:45 EST    I do not know at this point if it will get posted or not. Odds say it won't!

This was enjoyable to read. I’d argue against life after death on a doctrinal basis, but it has a scientific basis as well. The “life after death doc” does seem to have aroused you, though. That’s not so bad, right?

But the question you pose is by far the most interesting part.
Choose what you prefer:  an unfeeling mental giant, or a feeling child.”

You mean its an “either or” choice? I can’t have both? Why not? Why the narrowing of options, Arthur? I say its best to be both, a feeling person, with some roots and access to early feelings, as well as a sharply developed intellect. To leave out either, is to invite disaster. Your mistake is in only allowing one or the other or perhaps implying that having a bit of both is not even possible  . . .  unless we come to your place, of course.
I’ll keep what I got, thank you.

But now I will point out that it is the feeling stem that controls that cortex monster and hijacks it into serving the stem and its dubious motives. Perhaps the good doctor tires of this life and would prefer another so he imagines another. Its still the feelings that are in control, not the cortex. Sorry, old boy but I score one again!

I will be printing this whether it gets posted here or not. I win either way!



More Nonsense in "Science"  Dr. Janov

Posted: 26 Feb 2012 12:26 AM PST

“Intellectual ploys are all the rage for them because feelings can be avoided altogether.”
“Oh yes, it is called Cognitive Bias Modification; or changing how you see things.”
“If you say it in fancy patois it seems so serious and scientific. If you say it in everyday language it loses something in the translation. Whatever. It all makes me sick because it makes our field a laughing stock, bereft of any science except what they concoct that looks like science but is just the manipulation of statistics. Here the “right” people are promoting it so it becomes unassailable. How do you get to be the “right” people? Flee to your head.”

My reply  (shock of shock, it was posted!)
Apollo/Me: 1st Art,
It is not an intellectual ploy. It is a lie crafted to deceive and deny what the person seeks. Call it psychiatric or psychological junk food. It does not employ the intellect in any way. It appeals to people who want an easy way out and do not want real solutions and answers. That is the opposite of “intellectual.” Maybe you could define intellectual for me so that I know exactly what you are referring to, since we seem to possibly have very different understandings of that word.

It may be called “cognitive,” but that does not mean it improves cognition, awareness, and understanding. You can call something anything you want, but that does not mean it is what you say it is. And lets face it Art, you are great for redefining things in very peculiar ways and descriptions, which is why I asked for a clarification in the previous paragraph. Sophist gymnastics do not impress me.

Would you suggest these “promoters” are sincere or is there another motive, perhaps? I don’t see any possibility but sinister ones, myself. Now your last words were, with sarcasm, no doubt: “Flee to your head.”

One is not fleeing to their head when they embrace this stuff. They are ignoring good sound thinking, i.e. the intellect. I think the problem is that you do not understand what the intellect truly represents and is capable of and since you are a primal feelings hammer, everything looks like a nail. A good intellect would have recognized and avoided this scam.  

Arthur Janov               Feb 27, 2012 01:46 PM

Apollo: Not sure what to call it; simplistic, left brain intellectual concoctions emanating from a brain totally out of touch with any internal reality. Some one who has no inner life, no ability to reflect and put himself in question; someone wearing blinders who sees nothing of the world and his patients but his own projections. A small mind hiding behind an advanced degree who relies on it rather than real intelligence to get him through. A man with no self doubt, fixated on his own ideas irrespective if they have any basis in reality. A dangerous man because of all that; who can never help anyone. Art

My (apollo) reply (unposted so far)
Yes, those early analysts were paid liars and nothing has changed to this day. the mainstream are still paid liars and intellectual whores who go to the highest bidder. Money controls our world.

Well, as I see it, Art, and I do know what you refer to, the stem/core/1st level is hi-jacking the intellect. It is sabotaging intellectual function. You have been reluctant to accept this understanding. These pseudo intellectuals you refer to are dishonest, self-justifying sophists. Sophists do not believe right or wrong is important. It is who argues best. They ruined Greece. But against solid sound reasoning, sophists do not have a snowball’s chance in hell.

The advanced degree you speak of is what is known as authoritarianism. Preachers were great for using it. “You should listen to me because I am an authority and you are not.” “ I have a degree and you could not possibly know what I know as a result.” Weak minds actually go for that stuff.

But you and I are not responsible for the dub masses who fall for this stuff all the time, nor of those that promote it. We can expose them and promote more sound reasoning. Its all in the reasoning, Art. If its junk, it can be easily exposed. If there are no words to refute it, then we might want reconsider it. Lies can not overcome truth in people who want truth. Lies only appeal to those who like to be deceived. Let them be deceived if they insist.

Early in the same blog above where Maya is very active and defending the intellect,
I reply to Maya and Art after:

Me : Maya, you're right on! You can not force a cure.

Me: Art,
you mean well, but it appears to me that maybe at times, you employ techniques to force feelings up. It might work for a time, but sooner or later, the patient is going to take a stand and buck or resist. Its a failure waiting to happen. Most do not want to find that internal "truth." That is, as Maya pointed out, why PT is doomed to never be mainstream. Mainstream is neurosis in action. It does not want to see or find anything. It just wants to justify itself.


 apollo        Mar 3, 2012 10:12 PM

Quote from article: >>Those electric shock Primals are every bit as painful as any of my Birth Primals. But it was those Primals that normalized my startle response.<<

So there are some adult traumas that can equal the magnitude of Birth traumas. Interesting, indeed.

>>One treatment that could hold promise is called transcranial direct current electrical stimulation. The military is using it to amp up learning in order to teach Air Force pilots who guide unmanned attack drones. It helps the recipient to be alert, focused, and more able to find anomalies on the computer screen. It also cuts learning time in half.<<

I have been reading about this on the subject of mind control and hypnosis. The alpha state of the mind, suggested as 5-10 hz and upward to a certain point, as the range of alpha state. I have transcranial devices. If you get the FDA sanctioned ones, you’ll pay $2,000-$3,000 easy. But if you go with unapproved and un-guaranteed ones, you can get it for $200. Guess which route I went?

Alpha state is the state “programmers” need for their programming to work best and last longest. In fact, if “subjects” are on special missions, “they” keep the subject in a continual alpha state, having various multiple personalities, which they call “alters,” take turns minding the body and mind while the other personalities sleep. But it is not the deep 0.5-1.5 hz you would sleep in. Scary stuff. But things can be hidden away in minds that can not be retrieved, once placed and “sealed” off. Only the one who put it there can get it out.

I like using a 10 hz stimulation to get me alert and “high.” A strong magnetic field around the head can wipe out pain and anesthetize you as long as it stays on. I don’t have one of those and doubt I could afford one and I am sure they would be dangerous. There are places even I won’t go ;-) But not many!

>>But then Art suggested pharmaceuticals. He thought we should try a neocortical stimulant given along with something to quiet the brainstem.<<

Ah, notice that relationship between the stem and cortex. One has to quite the stem as well as stimulate the cortex. Art, that seems to support my theory a little more than yours. I say the stem has a lot of control and influence over the function of the cortex. You say the cortex can completely and utterly dominate the stem. I say one alone, the cortex, can not do that. The stem must cooperate. Evidence seems to favor my view. Just saying.

Nevertheless, I am impressed with Art’s use of drugs to compensate for inadequate brain structures and functions. In the face of such obstacles, there seem to be no other options. Incidentally, “programmers” also are very fond of using drugs, too. Specific types, of course. So like anything, therapy can be healing or harming, depending on who and what objective.

    Arthur Janov        Mar 4, 2012 11:30 PM

Apollo: You can quote me but don't quote me incorrectly. If you want to quote me find the quote and use it, then you can disagree. You have built up an idea that is not mine. Be more careful. art janov

>> Art is suggesting I am attributing an idea to Art that is not his. I assume, since he did not quote me, he is referring to the line I boldfaced. He has often gone back and forth about this. I will quote quite a few times. He does not like being shown as either contradictory, or outright wrong, says I! He could have plainly stated his position, but he chose not to. But since his stand on the intellect is on his site for all to see as well as him more recent books, I am not so sure this is what he was referring to. I think he was writing to me between the lines.

When he refers to me building up an idea, which one does he refer to? Notice he does not want to address anything in this post that was intended to be very hot by bringing up subject matter he has not wanted to admit or acknowledge. He cautions me: Be more careful. Is that a caution, or a threat and even intimidation? Does he not seem elusive? Concerned? He may have genuine concern for me in this instance. Those who practice the worst forms of mind control do not like being exposed. Just ask Fritz Springmeier if you doubt me. I replied asking him to point out what it was he objected to but he did not respond. He is either lying about what he has clearly gone back and forth on, or he is very concerned about what else was brought up. I think he has been warning to avoid mind control topics and possibly threatened.

Art has too much to lose at this point. Nice job and practice, status and recognition, even fame. he has a lot to lose. Let no one quickly find fault with him on this count or say, I'd never do that. Once you are on top of the world, its very hard to come down and lose it all. In the Great Depression, many killed themselves rather than go back to poverty and nothing. It remains for us who were born at the bottom with nothing to lose, to speak the truth for we have little more they can do to us other than imprison us or kill us. We have no wealth, status, or anything like those. That makes it tough to hurt us. We are the lucky ones. <<


apolloMar 17, 2012 08:20 PM

Art, if you recall your work on hypnosis and on Erikson in particular, who discovered the “silent observer,” right? This silent observer was able to communicate. Who and what is the silent observer? I suggest it is that 1st level stem, which still has a means to access and use abilities of the neocortex without letting the neocortex know that it is communicating.

So you say the right brain can not talk. Agreed. Talking is in the left, it would seem. But that which seems to access both hemispheres would be the stem and it can use all abilities and do so without being detected. Again, could you address the silent observer more for me/others. Who or what is it?

Feelings are vital and often missing. But to ignore the very obvious difference between very long term strategies and behavior, which exist almost exclusively in the intellect, whereas, feelings are almost always immediate and in the short term. If our full abilities are to be realized, we have to consider both short and long term, and feelings serve the short and thinking serves the long.

An intellect is vital! That so many fear getting in touch with the 1st level stem feelings, is why they suffer, because it is the stem that controls the other faculties of the mind, such as communication and yes, the intellect. You say no but I say yes. So let’s address this silent observer that Erickson discovered.

Arthur JanovMar 19, 2012 06:32 AM

Apollo: An intellect is vital but it must not be wasted on intellectuals. art

>> Art probably means well but he did not want to answer me directly. It was an escape from answering. Nor did he define intellectuals but I know what he means. I call them dishonest intellectuals. The lie quite deliberately. And to correct me,  Erickson called it the "hidden observer," not "silent observer", though it usually is. My bad!<<


I am not missing the point of PT&T. PT is missing the point. We still have minds and can and should use them rather than make excuses for carrying on as if we did not have one. Hey, look, I do not care whether a mother drowns her 5 kids in a bathtub because she is
a. Primally wounded
b. Drugged out of her mind
c. Threatened if she did not kill them
She should burn, suffocate, lethally inject, or whatever other methods a state might favor to get rid of a bridge too far. No excuses. Oh, she did know what she was doing. Sure, and I am the fairy godmother, too.

We have a responsibility to use our thinking minds. PT makes too damn many excuses and acts as if we could not get out of our own way. But consider that society has been telling kids for some time now that they do not know what they are doing. They accept this with joy cause now they can do whatever and not be accountable and they can make stupid silly excuses.

This is one of the things that holds PT&T form becoming accepted by good sensible people in greater numbers. I think, therefore, I am! And I will never stop thinking. But I can feel as well. The mind was designed to do both, Jack. It’s a fact. 

planespotter    Mar 15, 2012 06:37 AM

I have spent much of my life going on Gut instinct. Recent research suggests that those people who go with a gut instinct are more likely to be right than those who think something through in great detail. I would contest that "Gut Instinct" is a connection with the cut off part of us. The unconscious part of us that Dr Janov talks about. It is a connection with the body and after all, we are not a mind and body but one organism. If PT can unlock that unconscious part so that it fuses with the part of us that is already conscious then we are more likely to be able to understand our feelings. I know many people who think they are in touch with their feelings when in fact they feel without understanding. My understanding of really successful PT is to fuse the unthinking feeling part and the thinking unfeeling part into one balanced entity.

Thus a Mother who drowns her kids probably needs her early imprint to be understood. The State needs to understand why she did it in a true sense so that it does not happen again. To simply state that she should be burned, suffocated, lethally injected is the approach which probably got her there in the first place.

To say that we have a responsibility to use our thinking minds is suggesting that someone is aware of thier thinking mind. I have experienced first hand the completely irrational approach taken by a young Mother when stressed to the max and all reactions are total right Brain mis-understood feelings thought of as normal.

You are right Apollo that the Mind is designed to do both. It's just that many minds don't work like that.
Far better for the State to correctly understand than to use brutal and abusive death penalties in such cases.

The young kids saying "It's my Genes" just as previous generations said "It's instinct or drive" are using excuses provided by the State and the State gains great power by perpetuating those lies.
The Fact is that most people are fucked up but it's whether they know they are that matters.
Society is fucked up.

apolloMar 17, 2012 08:08 PM


I agree gut instinct is very important many times. A big help. But we also have to recognize that very same gut instinct can also lead us into psychosis and all sorts of difficulties. How do we tell when it is good or bad? Art says get PT and then you will be fine. I say we can determine without PT, if we have to and many of us do.

Logic, analyzing, and reason can identify whether a hunch is good or possible, or if it is suspect or should be questioned more carefully.

You said >>Far better for the State to correctly understand than to use brutal and abusive death penalties in such cases.<<

It is the responsibility of individuals to correctly understand themselves and get some control of themselves or they could end up facing a harsh judicial prospect. This is known as deterrence and an “encouragement” do get “better” before they do something very stupid.

The state could institute better education and seek to heal people’s minds and bodies, but the state finds far greater use in using people since the state is actually the property of big business and finance. The State is not a good mommy or daddy. The state is the wicked step mother of Cinderella.

The whole point of the intellect is to analytically deduce and define the what, where, why , and how of things. PT is based on science, not whim. But feeling alone will never fully help us. Long term thinking and behavior do not connect with feelings, which are almost always short term and in a context. To think beyond immediate feelings to long term things takes a mind-intellect, not feelings.

Of course, I never expect Primal fans to grasp this, since one would have to have both abilities to grasp this. There is a great divide between short term and long term vision and behavior. This is the discovery PT waits for but will not likely find. We are too busy doing other things and letting feelings take us far off track.

>> Its hard to win an argument with apollo. He is just too good at what he does . . .  and so modest, too. And what does he do? He analyzes like nobody else. Be assured, there is no conceit in my family, for I have every last bit of it. ;-) <<


apollo    Mar 17, 2012 08:20 PM

Art, if you recall your work on hypnosis and on Erikson in particular, who discovered the “silent observer,” right? This silent observer was able to communicate. Who and what is the silent observer? I suggest it is that 1st level stem, which still has a means to access and use abilities of the neocortex without letting the neocortex know that it is communicating.

So you say the right brain can not talk. Agreed. Talking is in the left, it would seem. But that which seems to access both hemispheres would be the stem and it can use all abilities and do so without being detected. Again, could you address the silent observer more for me/others. Who or what is it?

Feelings are vital and often missing. But to ignore the very obvious difference between very long term strategies and behavior, which exist almost exclusively in the intellect, whereas, feelings are almost always immediate and in the short term. If our full abilities are to be realized, we have to consider both short and long term, and feelings sever the short and thinking serve the long.

An intellect is vital! That so many fear getting in touch with the 1st level stem feelings is why they suffer because it is the stem that controls the other faculties of the mind, such as communication and yes, the intellect. You say no but I say yes. So let’s address this silent observer that Erickson discovered.

Arthur Janov   
Mar 19, 2012 06:32 AM

Apollo: An intellect is vital but it must not be wasted on intellectuals. art

Mar 19, 2012 08:17 PM

Arthur, I agree with you 100% because I perceive that you mean something quite different when referring to "intellectuals" vs an intellect. What most can not accept is that most so called intellectuals are intellectually dishonest. They do not promote honest objective reason and analysis. They promote what is dictated by some with vast control over wealth, resources and true knowledge as well as false knowledge. They withhold true knowledge or most of it and substitute lies.
This is the big step to hyper-learning ;-) OH, ain't that a slick new word, huh?

>> The thing here is, why does Art call phonies, intellectuals? They are not really intellectual. They are liars hiding the truth. Why not call them by that? By calling them intellectuals, he insults the intellect in its entirety. That may be his real intention. He does not want to come out and clearly say the intellect is bad but he does not want to concede that it is good and even as important as feeling and getting feelings out by feeling them.<<


Sunday, May 20, 2012
A Dialogue About "Science"

Paul        May 21, 2012 1:59 AM

>> I posted this but it did not get posted. No surprise there! <<


We exclude our emotions temporarily (you don’t, I know. That part of the problem) to see if we can verify them or not by reason alone, even as Andrew describes above earlier. We still have and use feelings, but we also try them and test them, to see if we can be sure. Both Andrew and I would admit to being neurotic. Despite that, we can see the validity of PT.

You speak as if I or others like me (that might be 1 or 2) simply avoid feelings altogether. That is patently wrong to the core. In fact, I’d suggest I run on more feelings that you or many other here who have not had therapy, do. That is why I can have an acid trip on mere pot/weed.

I do not react to insults (usually) because I see through those insults with intellectual and feeling discernment. My ego is not threatened by long years of training it or it submitting to training of its own will. It is possible. And if I did react, Art would not allow it, anyway. Its only guys like you who have total freedom. You are not threat to anyone. I am.

A good intellectual process does not lead to intuitive results. It is quite often counter-intuitive and one must trust the instruments and reasoning, since they seem counter to intuition. They do not set off resonance with the stem.

Many long term hidden situations are full of extreme danger, but we do not know them because they are hidden and do not resonate with our normal immediate fear sensors in our stem. We remain relaxed and unaware of the greater hidden dangers. Only a careful search of reason and fact can deduce such dangers. If we do not discern these long-term dangers, we are in as much danger as if confronted by a lion face to face without a gun.

The intellect is extremely useful for detecting lies, deceit, subterfuge, and other sorts of clandestine activity. This is the intellect’s greatest function. It senses a kind of danger that exists on another level or plane, one not instinctual, gut, feeling or maybe not feeling entirely but maybe some feelings going off that we do not understand correctly.

Since you have not developed such an intellect, you really are not in a position to judge or expound upon them. Art says we are in great danger from our buried pain and I agree. But we are in another danger that can not be felt but is still there, if we use reason right. It, too, is as dangerous as those unconscious, unresolved feelings inside. Which one gets us first, is by no means certain.

Both are equally important and this is the major disagreement between Art and I. I say both must develop together in a hurry. If you can only pick one, take the intellect, unless you have pain beyond your ability to control.


Andrew had previously said:
"It is impossible for a rational mind to fill mystery with fairytale, and believe it like it's real. Only the deluded can believe in delusions."
I replied:

apollo has left a new comment on the post "More on My Primal World":

Hi Andrew!
I thought I would just throw this in. Only those who want to be deluded, can and will believe their delusions. and where does the desire to be deluded come from? I would suggest fear, anxiety, dread, and like. Those are 1st and 2nd level feelings that can go as far as to instruct the mediator of the external senses, the cortex, to see what is not there, hear what is not sounding, and think and believe what is not so. I do not think the cortex is capable of rebellion and refusing to take orders from below.

I am dealing with a person in my life right now, who has no pre-frontal cortex control of feelings, urges, or emotions. He is a runaway freight train heading down a steep hill. He does not want to hear or see bad in himself or see need for improvement or change. He is at the mercy of the animal 1st/2nd level in him. His cortex is virtually dormant if not comatose. Do you see the problem? The core (1st/2nd) has shut down the thinking brain. Only problem is, the gates don’t work so well, so he suffers and drinks like a fish. No way to control the cortex very well, so he is someone no one likes to be around.

Delusions are not motivated by the cortex. It is the core that drives the cortex to do as the core pleases. Always had been, always will be.

>> Just another vain attempt by me to demonstrate that the stem (1st level) is always in control unless it, itself, willing gives control over to the intellect when it wants to. Art denies this as do his mindless followers. But old apollo (Truth1 to many of you) keeps haunting them with their own errors and contradictions. MK Mind Controllers know I am right ;-) But they won't admit it, either!<<


What Causes Alzeihmers?    Posted: 23 Dec 2012 03:12 AM PST

In response to Art's article, I submitted this for posting, Dec 25, 2012, 4:37 PM EST:

apollo >> Geez, I hate to beat something to death (but ya gotta do what ya gotta do, right?) but it looks like the stem drives the brain into action to try to dissipate all the trauma and its energy. Put in other words, the cortex was pressed into action by the stem. My father fits this article very closely. It was not the cortex that acted of its own accord. The stimulation was from below, not outside. And even when from outside, it touches off that which is down far below, not the top, that can not even feel. All feeling coming from the outside is felt below. But Primal patients do not discern this. They imagine the cortex feels and reacts. They know not where the feeling even comes from.

The cortex always reacts to the feelings from below and then begins its assignment from below. And just as a heatsink dissipates heat from an engine or electronic chips, so the activity of the cortex helps dissipate the primal energy of the imprint from below. Poor cortex! He gets the blame for everything, and then has to take the heat for it, too. Where's the justice? ;-)


What About Drugs to Help Us Feel

Posted: 30 Dec 2012 11:19 AM PST

I attempted to post this to the above blog (without success) maybe early morning, Dec. 31, 2012:

Power of Emotions

It struck me as a read this and had thought some a few days previous. Emotions are so powerful, and often if not nearly always, make us act stupid, or behave in obsessive compulsive ways, although Paul might disagree that our 1st/2nd level is dumb, so to speak, due to pain. Pain does not take a direct course of healing. It often prevents its own healing or even causes further harm.

Intellectual thoughts, on the other hand, though perhaps offering a good strategy for behavior and living, do not, by themselves, excite anything. The cortex has no emotions. Those come from below. But that is not to say that ideas are not exciting or dreadful. The 1st/2nd can get excited over an idea, if it fits in with “their” scheme. Or “they” might dread the thought.

But how does the 1st/2nd come to either love or hate an idea, thereby giving that idea some sudden power and impact? Somehow, the 1st/2nd, seems to evaluate each thought or idea in its particular way, to decide whether to like or dislike an idea, or love or hate it, pursue it more, avoid it more, or whatever. Are we getting the picture?

Emotions react to the cortex thoughts. They form a relationship with the cortex. Each person forms a different relationship with their cortex. Some 1st/2nd’s; have the unique experience of recognizing that the cortex, if allowed by the 1st/2nd, to search out a matter objectively, can produce sound long-term solutions and strategies that can help the welfare of the entire person. After a while, the 1st/2nd comes to value and trust the cortex searching without hindrances from below. So when the “below” gets a bad feeling, it suppresses it and allows the cortex to do its thing. We call this courage, but it is merely the “below” awakening to the importance and value of an objective honest evaluation and acting on that, despite conflicting emotions.

Some “below’s” hold back pain imprints due to not sensing a safe environment. Or maybe the urgency is quite low and so it continues suppressing. Suppressing perhaps, because the world is a hostile dangerous place. But not all sense the world that way. But maybe they should.

But whether pain comes up and is released, or not, is strictly for the stem to decide, since the process is instinctive, as is the case with so many functions of the brain. The Cortex has no direct impact on the stem’s trust or lack of trust. The Cortex is there for the stem to use or not.

>> Trying to show how the intellect/cortex is not an independent agent that can be blamed for corrupt motives. Those motives come from the core stem and limbic system. The Bible refers to it symbolically as the heart.  I praise and promote the intellect, but in doing so, try to illuminate just how that is done. Our deep inner self must learn to seek objective honesty analysis of the intellect and not let fear or dread scare one away from pursuing pure uncorrupted intelligence. Courage is another name for that. <<  


Posted by Frank to Janov's Reflections on the Human Condition at April 3, 2013 at 2:19 AM

Frank has left a new comment on the post "On Killing Pain":

Words in itself want do it!

When I see people make an effort to intellectuals areas it is not difficult to see how impossible it is for them to explore other perspectives of life. Intellectuality in itself is a process that works in itself and prevents what intellectuals phenomena contain. It contains intelligence if used to the border where the pain begins. Primal therapy has to become official professional to achieve the status of being discovered.

"An intelligent man may be intellectual... but an intellectual is absolutely not not intelligent". This phenomenon... phenomenon for not being recognized among the intellectuals is a crucial problem since it requires emotional insight to explain itself.


>> Bad intellectuals! How dare we criticize the gods of PT. Shame on us, right? See, all fans of Art seem to despise the intellect imagine the intellect can not progress without getting all primaled out, which takes many many years to do, for many. How is that for a rosy outlook?<<


Based on the following post:

I quote the author in my attempted post:

Apollo: Jan says: "Remember the rule that intuition cannot be trusted in the absence of stable regularities in the environment."

I agree in part. Intuition can mislead. What never gets acknowledged is that reasoning can still function if the person wanted it to function. Does he have a reason to make it function? That is, has he encountered something that forces him to find a new solution or answer? And does he take the right path or flee from what he knows instinctively, he wants to avoid.

Jan, I really think it boils down to one very simple premise. Each patient has to be sincere in what they are looking for. If they are, then can find it. Very few people discover PT, because very few want to discover PT. It is that simple! Even of those who find it, some quit, resist, make excuses or take wrong turns of the mind/intellect.

It is not the intellect, but that which motivates the intellect. Long term strategies and rules for living have to be discerned. Many of these might be called philosophy, but many are applied by so called talk therapists.

If we obey traffic rules, we reduce our chances (not eliminate them) of harm to ourselves. Likewise, if we pick good rules and strategies to live by, we may live better lives and maybe even save our lives at times, by avoiding wrong paths.

PT proponents ignore this completely and blame the intellect, rather than that which motivates the intellect. If we are insincere, like many of our politician friends, then I will claim to be a prophet (psychic if you prefer) and not only predict, but guarantee that failure will result, whether in therapy, or any other endeavor in life. Carve this in stone and use it against me 

A healthy society? Well, surely respect and devotion to truth might have a chance of producing a healthy society. But with people awash in pain and obsessed with unfulfilled needs that pull them in wrong directions, I don’t see it ever happening. Could it be, may I suggest, there is no hope. That is not coming from a depressed downcast man but one who simply looks at the facts as they truly are. Some things really genuinely are impossible. I can accept that. I am not ruled by fear of bad conclusions.

PT is very difficult to obtain, even for those who might genuinely want it. That, too, is a serious problem. I could talk conspiracy theories and spooky things in secret places, but I will not bother. Most minds are too tender to unload the dregs of humanity upon.

But suffice to say that we are not even scratching the surface of what all the problems really are and we, as a group, never will. Only brave individuals will ever reach that.

End of post, submitted May 11, 2013, and not posted by Art.

>> Rules? Strategies? They don't even know what these are, nor admit they can be discerned through careful objective reasoning. Listen, when you are surrounded by irrational people, which Primal Therapy does attract like a magnet, you soon lose sight of the fact that some people can be normal, despite primal pain. Art's practice is self-reinforcing and self-blinding. What is more, he would have no practice at all, or a much reduced one, if he did not constantly promote a solution that was no solution at all.

How odd that one would promote or sell PT, only to avoid trying to do anything with it after, like finding rules and strategies for better living choices and outcomes. Pursue feeling so you can think, and then avoid thinking. Sounds pretty stupid to me. I sense some deep flaws in its origins. A wall of denial does not bode well for anyone.<<


Another blog entry was posted, with a personal patient experience.

It took her from 1974, on and off to the present, 2013, some 39 years, to get to where she is and that is nowhere near getting to her birth primals. Is it really an effective therapy, if it does not get you to the point of reliving your birth entirely, even after 39 years. Who is the real sucker here, I have to ask. So I submitted the following post, knowing full well, it pointed out too much truth. That is a problem I have ;-)

Apollo:      I am happy for the patient that payoffs are finally arriving, after only 39 years of on an off therapy. How encouraging, if you can sense my sarcasm. Nothing better illustrates how useless PT can be, when the scope of time encompasses an entire lifetime.

As Emma put it, “I'm discouraged by how I can go through the feelings and function at the same time. I got to a point where I was sleeping 2 hours a night and not able to work. Without work I cannot live. It's not so simple. There are many things that enable people to succeed in primal and I think these need to be addressed more to really help the patient.”

Its not really working, at least not enough to leave people able to function. But yet, discerning healthy rules and strategies for living, acting, etc.; these can make great differences and do so almost immediately. The POWER of good decisions and choices! Its amazing! The many dangers of bad decisions and choices. Prisons are loaded with those types.

To be in such denial of all this, makes me seriously wonder about people and their motives and abilities. 
>>End of post, submitted May 15, 2013, 5 AM.<<

It was posted a few days later, I guess.

Emma had posted in that blog as well and I quoted her from that. but she came the closest to saying the truth, which was, that more needs to be addressed in this subject, than Art has been willing to address or admit. But yours truly remains ever hyper-vigilant. Missing from Art's formula is how much the patient is serious and determined, in getting to their feelings. I believe this is always the most important factor. Just because you can sell someone an idea, does not mean they are truly right for the therapy or that it will succeed. Art tries to use high cost and 3 weeks commitment to make sure they are invested. But many who are invested, are unaware (maybe) that they are not really wanting to get down to the bottom of their feelings.

Kathleen Sullivan, a former CIA mind control victim, spoke of the thousands of traumas that such victims are filled with, and that trying to get through them all is impossible or nor worth it. Once she got a good level of comfort and function, she does not bother with continued reliving. One does have to find time to live and enjoy life, too. Of course, Art will not even admit that Sullivan and others like her even exist. The good doctor would appear to be covering for someone or something. Just my opinion on the matter.

Myself having been a refugee from a very controlling and deceptive religion, I can recognize a charlatan when I see one or a bogus offer when it is presented. Yes, that is my gift. I would not fault Art at all, if he just acknowledged how powerful and transforming a good idea or decision can be. But to deny it or just shrug it all off as nothing, that is what destroys his credibility, as I see it. And that he can censor and control who says what, if anything, looks an awful lot like what Cult leaders do. And to avoid a subject that like clandestine government mind-control is just plain dishonest, isn't it? Further, that subject has so much more to reveal about the mind healing itself as well. There is no good excuse for it! Pick your prophets carefully!

It turns out that Arthur did leave a good response, though I wonder about the dates. But lets look at it. I go to brackets and brown text to comment.

Arthur JanovMay 16, 2013 at 1:39 PM

apollo: I used to think it was an amazing discovery to cure people. But there is something that is hard to explain: the amount of unconscious pain we all carry within ourselves. The pain we consciously feel may not feel like it requires 40 years of therapy, but that is because we don't feel the unconscious part that is much greater. And the more you feel in therapy, the deeper you go, the more you uncover the unconscious pain, the more you realize the intensity and amount of what you were carrying.
Therapy can only follow each individual natural rhythm and what their body can take out, one piece at a time. So in fact, I don't want to sound pessimistic, but people with massive early trauma may not have enough of a life time to resolve it entirely, even with Primal Therapy.
>>This is all I ever really wanted from Arthur. An honest reasonable outlook. I don't mind optimistic results, but candidly addressing of all results, including the not so good ones, is proper and scientific by being unbiased and addressing all results. It does not negate PT in the least, since every patient is different in amount and other factors. These are what some critics have been saying about PT, but now it is being admitted. This improves Art's credibility and makes him look more trustworthy, don't you think?<<
However it is still better to take it out, one piece at a time, and live a better life day after day. And I agree with you, healthy diet, exercise, all these other tools we can find can definitely help greatly too. As Primal therapists, we are charged with taking pain out. We never put it in, someone else did.
end of Post <<<

Back to black text for me. PT is a great thing for some to pursue, if they struggle with coping with day to day life. But as well, it leaves many without options. It should not be wrong to say that this is not for everyone. My impression is that Art usually says all other options, except PT, are completely useless and this I strongly disagree with. Exploring good rules and strategies for living is vital, as well. And though finding such things are hard for some too messed up, so to speak, to find. But as well, though most of us will struggle to find good rules, strategies and solutions, to some degree it can be done and the results will be positive and helpful. This is not so much "talk" therapy as it is exploring and identifying what might improve our lives or help us make better decisions.

These are things psychology pursues less and less. They like to tell you, you are OK, no matter what you are. I do believe there are things that work and things that do not. why not admit them and recommend those that most seem to benefit from? Explore why some things seem to work so well and others do not. Why not try to understand life some, right? PT is supposed to help us explore and pursue things more effectively, if not do so for the 1st time. So if it is good after PT, why not before and during PT?

Art lightly dismisses it as "talk" therapy, which is really very inaccurate for what it could be or should be. There is a lot of talk therapy that goes nowhere. I fully agree with Art on this. Psychology and Psychiatry are a mess and highly suspect in my view. But I have also seen some very good results, even a remarkable one, for some who have pursued therapy and began to wake up and ask questions and get answers and think about life as never before. They start to use their minds. I have only the highest of regard for such results.

PT is a great option for any who can easily make room for it. But most have to continue working and relating to people so it is not always easy to change your circumstances to accommodate Primal Therapy. I'm all for PT, but I am all for also developing the mind and thinking and understanding the world. Why not go for both. I have accumulated much in this article where thinking is very frowned upon and persecuted. No question there. So I would like to see that change.

But that Art finally made a conciliatory admission is a welcomed change of pace. Candor is vital to credibility and I want Art and PT to thrive and continue, with ever greater improvements, such as giving more respect to thinking. I know Art would say that most can not think well due to pain. But I also think it is because they are too foreign to thinking and so their minds or strength of minds is weak and clumsy, even as as young child might be in first learning to walk. They are not good at it and they fall and crawl. but in time, through trying, they gain strength, coordination and balance by trying. The brain will do the rest.

Lets give some respect to that brain that either evolution or God gave to us. I am not doubting God, but allowing for others to doubt God or believe in evolution. What ever it is, the brain is a remarkable accomplishment, however it got here. We need to start trusting it and putting it to use.


This next one is a classic illustration of how followers of Janov typically end up rejecting any attempts at reasoning and learning how to better reason and analyze, and just go with feelings.

Sunday, May 12, 2013            I Feel Good: A Letter From a Patient

Richard Atkin   May 31, 2013 at 4:03 PM

During a primal, one is aware of both the present and the past, but the past is the dominant experience. From this it is easy to concoct the following theory:
By accessing the past and present simultaneously, the patient can use the present to update his reaction to the past.

I have decided to trash that theory because it does not work when we apply it to the following scenario:
The patient has lost a loved one -- there will never be a happy ending - there will never be any reason for the pain to go away.

But the pain does go away, or at least weakens eventually doesn't it? Why?

This brings me to a more simplistic theory:
Pain forces it's owner to take a defensive action.

Pain has no other purpose. One does not need pain in order to become aware of the damage -- to this end a pleasant signal would suffice.

Pain motivates. Pain is very much a part of love. A loving mother hurts when she sees her child dangling from a very high tree branch.

The more danger, the greater her pain, and the more motivation to take a defensive (protective) action. From a logical point of view, the mother should feel no pain when her child dies because no defensive action is required. She should feel joy for the wonderful life her child had, and she should simply remember to educate her other children on the hazards of tree-climbing.

Or from an equally logical point of view, she should feel huge pain for eternity because there is no defensive action that can resolve the traumatic event.

I guess the brain does not adhere to a perfectly logical premise. We are blessed with a grey ball of meat that gives us the motivation to do the right things, but, being a product of random evolution (perhaps not so random when we consider the effects of epigenesis) it is not perfectly suited to our desires. Sometimes we have no choice but to feel pain and allow nature to run it's course. As Paul says, let it play out like a gramophone.

I need to stop concocting useless theories and start making better use of my intellect.
END of 1st post <<<

>>Richard gets discouraged. He tries, but does not realize that he is perhaps trying something that he has not tried much in the past and is maybe not that good at it yet. I offered this encouragement next:<<

apollo   June 1, 2013 at 7:44 AM

Richard, you are doing just fine. Just don't stop. Keep on pondering, searching, and seeing what others have to say. In time, if the desire to know and explain is there, you will come to an answer and a better knowledge and continually gets better. You sound more rational in this post than ever before. You are making progress. That is all any of us can do.
The subject you bring up has an interesting proposition by MIT author Marvin Minsky, from his book, "the Emotion Machine." In just the 1st 48 pages, he has a very good explanation for why pain and emotion. Ideas can be very fleeting and fickle. So to establish or even overcome an idea, it might help to be slow to do either. Emotions and pain tend to make us slow to throw out what we are given by parents, for our protection, since whether good or bad, it is our parents who are most likely to have out best interests.

the challenge, of course, is to eventually, evaluate all we "inherited," and decide what stays and what goes. Marvin can be a little dry but he is worth it. If you can not find the book near you, and don't want to buy it (just yet) I can scan the few pages that are really good. He is a fancy MIT big thinker. He is not a PT guy but he touches on it related stuff more than just about anyone else who is not. Just a suggestion. I'll have to remember to get my camera from the house I am fixing.
END of post <<<

>>When we are small, learning to walk takes time since neither the brain nor the body are developed and strong enough for the challenge. In particular, if as we grow, and happen to be attracted to sports, we may need or seek training, or get lots of exposure and experience in order to learn and develop. A large part of getting better is just building more strength in the muscles so that you can perform the tasks needed to let the brain then just worry about controlling the strength better. the more we try, the better we get.

Most people do not attempt to be sharp in wisdom and reason. So they are weak and flabby so to speak, not very good at it. But anyone can get better by continually trying. The foundations of our society are built upon reason and analytical skills, which allow us to come to common agreement on academic and scientific matter, law and government. Really, our society would collapse without reason and analysis. Janov has always tried to use science to support his theories. His fans have come to appreciate his ideas, because of this ability to see the logic and supporting reasoning behind PT.

Yet, Janov seems to discourage thinking, otherwise and his followers conform to that. This phrase comes to mind. "Forgive them Father, for they know not what they do." Richard is one of those many followers as you can see next in his reply to me.<<

Thanks for the offer apollo but I am not interested anymore because I can see that there is no tidy explanation. Why does it take a long time to heal from the loss of a loved one? If you try to think of all the possible answers you soon realise that you are disappearing into intellectual land; the place where answers are imagined and inconclusive. There comes a point where we just have to step back and allow the most important information to dominate. OK?
END of post <<<

>>The worst thing about this is that Richard does not believe that he can do both PT and still try to think, analyze, and reason. It an either or and the good Dr. Janov would have it. But let me make this so clear. I believe you can and absolutely should do both, but more particularly the reasoning, by seeking different views and trying to be objective.

Janov says without PT, you can't reason right and should not try. That is my impression. You have his many expressions right in this article to see that. What I say, is that because of the very serious flaw I see in most PT believers, that PT theory is fatally flawed and dangerous, due to its proclaimed limits of our abilities if we are not pain free, which could take a lifetime and not be fully accomplished.

Richard and many like him will never dare to trust themselves or their marvelous brains, developed by God or evolution, which ever you prefer. It is this slighting of the brain that I find so reprehensible and unappealing. Richard does not want to bother with thinking. He must not believe in himself or he got discouraged. Or he has been mezmerized by the Grand master of PT, who is evidently infallible, I gather. If he is not, let him declare so and renounce the avoidance of thinking.

Real thinking should not interfere with feelings. Whether feelings interfere or not is more due to an individual and his/her motivations deep inside themselves. Internal corruption is always a danger for us all.

So Richard has retired from any thing but feelings I gather. those who run the world will love that. The question now, is whether Janov works for those who rule the world, or not. But to my way of thinking, promoting us all as mental cripples is offensive and rejected, regardless of why it is promoted. This is the true evil of a narrow view of PT. And it is why I find other practices that subscribe to most PT principles as more attractive and reasonable.

They say the fruit does not fall far from the tree. Jesus says you can know a "tree" by the fruit it bears. I say these are true. And because of that, I do not recommend Arthur Janov anymore, since he will try, in my opinion, to stop you from going in certain directions and to discourage any attempts at thinking.

Even after you have rid yourself of all primal pain, if that is ever possible, you will still need to think and reason. You need to start that now and do it always. Avoid anyone who suggests otherwise, and many suggest that otherwise. I believe my case is well demonstrated by this point and time, for this section.<<

Intellect 4 Nothing
Back to Top

From Janov's blog:

The Real Role of the Neocortex        Posted: 13 Mar 2014 07:56 AM PDT

So what do you think it is?  I submit that its primary is to keep us from feeling.  And that allows us to slay our enemies with impunity.  If this were not the case, ordinary Germans would not have stood by and watched them shoot Jews in the back, or gas them in caves.  If this were not true then it would have been impossible for Whites to stand around and watch Southerners lynch Blacks as if going to some kind of celebration..  In other words, the neocortex’ job is shut down feelings and allow us to be swallowed up by ideas and propaganda and beliefs that paints others as killable.  Now we know one key function of ideational therapy; like the Germans, fill their heads full of so many ideas, the more convoluted the better, that feelings no longer have any place.

>>Primarily  .  .  . to keep us from feeling. Wow! 3 million years of evolution for nothing, right? Or God gave us a brain for nothing. Can I say any more? The neocortex, as I take it, has no real benefit otherwise. Its just a hat rack I guess. so much for philosophy, early psychology, science, technology. All that is for nothing. That not me saying that, though! Not feeling allow us, says Janov, to slay our enemies and he gives some examples. So the neocortex is responsible for pathology of all types I gather. Further stated in the blog, that ideational therapy only serves to enable genocide or the like. What, is that a big leap or what? Sounds out in left field to me.<<

So tell me.  Why are we doing psychotherapy that lives in our heads, that confines ideas to the intellectual and that suppresses feelings?  Since it is clear that neurosis is a disease of feeling how can we ever get well while neglecting and repressing them?  Well, you say, I practice meditation and that relaxes me.  I think you believe it relaxes you.  Not quite the same thing.  I mean how can you neglect feelings and be relaxed when it is imprinted pain and tension that prevents relaxation?  Otherwise, how could it be that my patients drop many signs of pain permanently after months of feeling pain?  Lower cortisol, lower blood pressure and heart rate, etc.    And the one thing that cannot be faked, radical changes in the amplitude and frequency of brain waves.

>>Now he declares that either psychotherapy:
1: lives in our heads only
2: confines ideas to the intellectual
3: suppresses feelings
Wow, all that, huh? I was not aware that psychotherapy did all that. I don't believe it does, either.

Look kids! Here is how I see it. Janov avoids many subjects and ideas. We who read or used to, Janov's blog regularly, know that he knows about the hidden observer of Hilgard's work. The implications of the hidden observer, which I know of none that deny its existence, is huge on all aspects of the mind/brain. The hidden observer can literally shut reality entirely out, and even make up its own reality. The hidden observer is always awake even while the intellect sleeps. Janov has never wanted to admit that the hidden observer, who is largely resident in the reptillian brain, controls the intellect and autonomic functions if it so chooses. The hidden observe is all powerful. Janov ignores all of this and has throughout his blog.

Yes, "feeling primal pain does eliminate signs and signals of pain and changes measurement of the body. No dispute there. But it does not reinforce his vendetta against the intellect. As well, a study of mind control victims also demonstrates the power of the hidden observer to enable the mind to be completely controlled and make anything possible, bad or good. It has nothing to do with the intellect.<<

Here is the problem.  If we agree about imprints, that bad memories are stored deep in the brain and agitate us all of the time, then how can we really relax in a “head” therapy…a therapy that rides above the imprint?  And all new neurobiologic information confirms for all time the veracity and the impact of the imprint which now inhabits the primitive genes and cells.  How can we relax when we enter a therapy whose ancient, prehistoric role is to push back feelings?  If you don’t believe it look again at the Nazis who were ordinary Germans, after all.  Marlene Dietrich never spoke to her sister again after she learned that she lived across the way from a death camp.  How could she? She could because many of the Germans’ minds had been filled for years about the inferiority of Jews, and those ideas occupied most of their neo-cortex, which allowed them to watch and tolerate killing without any feeling.  So now we know that dental scientists can drill on your teeth with no pain so long as they explain to you that their hypnosis (ideas) will take care of the hurt.  And mostly it works.  Excuse the expression but it is all a “mind-fuck”.  It is cognitive manipulation, which shows how susceptible it all is.  And  of course when you fill a child’s head with ideas early on they tend to stick.  Those first impressions are powerful and they endure.

>>Janov says hypnosis is ideas. Not, that's not a typo. And all this time, I thought it was the hidden observer. Gosh, what do I know, anyway. But I still says its the hidden observer. Janov says its cognitive manipulation. I say its manipulation of the hidden observer. I will be most psychologists would agree with me. Janov points out that whatever you put in a child's head tends to stick. But Marvin Minski explains that in his book, "The Emotion Machine." Again, it relates to the hidden observer, and its emotions. Its emotions that make ideas stick. Janov has not yet figured that out. Yes, there are mind-fucks going on and I think Janov is promoting a few of them himself.<<

Hitler could feel for his dog because his head left a little space for other beings but not much space.  So again, how can any therapy that specializes in ideas and insights get you well when the real problem resides far deeper in the brain.  So any therapy that includes beginning with ideas, beliefs and notions does not penetrate to where it has to go.  Think of it this way:  any therapy where the therapist directs you, even “do this and then do that,” is most often a detour.  Therapy has to be inner prompted.  If it comes from someone else it is her ideas not yours.  We have all enough manipulation in our lives but the problem is that we get used to being manipulated and told how to think so we just slip into being directed.  Ayayay.

>>Indeed, ideas and insights often do not make an impact. Again, Janov wants to hide from the hidden observer and its implications. His struggle against it strikes me as titanic, gargantuan. What a struggle! What is he running from? Then he says "Therapy has to be inner prompted." I agree! Inner prompting would be the hidden observer. So let me ask, Arthur says: "If it comes from someone else it is her ideas not yours." Agreed. And yet, how is it that parents' ideas seem to stick and last? Are these not contradictions. Why are some outside ideas long lasting while others make no impact at all? Answer? The Hidden Observer of Hilgard! Then he admits that we get used to (conditioned to) being manipulated and so we continue to slip into being manipulated or directed. Oh, so is conditioning an idea, or a conditioning by experience, not words or idea? Poor Arthur is so confused.<<

I have had patients, many, who after months of Primal suddenly are aware of the egregious mistakes they made with their kids.  This, after we liberated the pain and feelings.  As a result of feelings they were now aware, not like before, aware in their heads but consciously aware due to feeling feelings. Yes feelings provide real conscious awareness, not cognitive awareness which rides about them.  Suddenly one sees that he ignored the child’s drawings leaving his son feeling a bit less capable.  Or spanking his daughter cause he learned about “tough love."  Never once imagining the consequences of their actions.  But feelings make you conscious and aware and finally about to see, really see.

>>Note very carefully how has has gone from blaming the neocortex for ideas and genocide, but now feelings cause or deny awareness, memory, sympathy, and empathy. Janov is up and down and back and forth. Strikes me as totally confused. Alzheimer's? I'm just wondering. I say the hidden observer hides compassion and enables or avoids awareness, compassion, etc.<<

Historically then, shutting down served many functions, not letting feelings interfere with what had to be done.  And above all, permitting us actions of which we could not feel.

>>The above was, a paragraph earlier, feelings, that shut down or opened up. Now its back to the neocortex. See what I mean? Sad, isn't it? And this is a professional! Ayayay.<<

Thus the origin of the neo-cortex, very important for connection to lower level feelings but remaining able to shut them out when they become dangerous (my mother does not love me.  I cannot live without love.).

>>Only the hidden observer can shut/hold down or allow feelings to come up.<<

So if we ignore the pain it will always be there and we cannot ever really relax.  How could it be otherwise, unless we live in a world of denial where we never acknowledge it?  We cannot have it both ways;  we cannot be feeling humans and ignore feelings.  We cannot relax without brain surgery to cut out memory.  We can never relax as long as ideas and beliefs occupy feeling space?  And so, following evolution, as I have noted a myriad of times, ideas and insights must come to us in evolutionary sequence: after feelings, as they did for millions of years.

>>It was ideas, and now it is feelings again. And the poor hidden observer remains hidden to wreak havoc and control. The enemy we do not know is often our worst enemy. But saddest is how the neocortex and intellect get scrubbed as being nothing and carrying out what is actually carried out the by hidden observer that even Janov has written about and should know about. There you have it!<<

Against Religion
Back to Top

Arthur Janov has left a new comment on the post "So Who Needs More Love?":
Mike: Forgiveness is a religious notion; nothing to do with any therapy or science. art.        Jan 22 2012

Jan 31, 2012 01:36 PM
If, IF we could find a way to restore the extended family system then we could learn and teach many things like this to our children and even to recovering adults like ourselves. There have been many, many attempts in the last 100 years to restore working models and the history of it is encouraging. Committed groups have restored this level of trust. Even us neurotics can do it. We don't need Mr. (or Mrs.) God either.   
Paul G.

>> Forgiveness a religious notion? I guess he has never heard of a legal pardon. You see, he does have a real grudge against religion, despite words to the contrary. Art contradicts himself a lot. Notice his fans like Paul also carry that grudge. The fruit does not fall far from the tree.<<


A Janov Quote from:     More on My Primal World      Posted: 12 Dec 2012 02:12 AM PST

“We won’t look for salvation because we no longer look for a savior.    We can save ourselves.   I will leave it to you to see about religion; but John Lennon said it:  the dream is over…..I don’t believe in…...

All this is not in the realm of improbable or impossible.  We have the means to do it all NOW.   But first, a small detail.  We need to produce feeling human beings who have enough of themselves not to be taken in.  After that, the rest is easy.”

>> I love this one. "We can save ourselves." I see this attitude among most humans. I laugh. We'll see where this idea is at in 10 years.<<


We got a problem!

We can't attribute mom to be as loving as our need shows... why we "created" us gods for the purpose. When I see how people worship God… it is not difficult to see the enormous need that has emerges. To imagine a mother be worshiped in this way ... it is not difficult to see which needs that was dammed up without being satisfied.

It is hard to see the possibility for Primal Therapy run out of steam through all those billions of people who so clearly worship their mother through god ... worship for mercy for its need... needs who alleviates sufferings.

A need "teleported" into a world much later... now… later without perceiving the context of the need... "teleported" as it instantly is... are now... far from when it was… then was… that is way... we have forgotten and repressed.

It is terribly frustrating to see how this can passes without a revolution necessary its cause... how human memory fails... but also that no one suspects god to be an illusion representing the need for mom… mom of love for my life.

There is only one reason for it... and that is... primal therapy do not let itself be presented... something that falls on our own shoulders.




What you say probably fits many people. But why I believe in God, as opposed to needing God, does not fit into your assumptions. There are other possibilities. I personally fail to see why Primal Therapy and theory must, of necessity, rule out God or only allow for insanity as a reason to believe, or if you prefer, need.

What remains is that we have this pain deep inside us that is responsible for most of our suffering and it needs fixed. PT is a therapy and science, and not so much religion or philosophy. Most have trouble separating them.

Further, when religious hypocrites are found, many disown religion and/or God. Yet, when science or politics reveal their own hypocrites, we do not disown those. Why is that? Sounds like a grudge against religion and God or gods. Why not disown politics? Why not rebel against science? I think those offended by hypocritical people perhaps need a bit more therapy of the primal type. There is a lot to say for consistency in judgment.


On Science, Suppression
Back to Top

apollo has left a new comment on the post "On Going Hunting":
The only difference I would make is that I would never suggest that PT being ignored was innocent. It has been deliberately suppressed. One only need examine their motives and goals to realize that they do not have our interests at heart. they have their own interests at heart and those are opposed to ours. We are suppressed and enslaved, at least mentally. And they want it to stay that way.

To fix that, as Jim RM and others suggest, means to admit the real agenda going on. And we both know that will not make any friends. the Media supply our info, our "food" for the mind. Our voices need to be numerous enough that it starts to make a dent on that prevalent media message. At least if there were agreement among primal fans, it would be a start. But if even we can not agree, well, it was once said, A kingdom divided against it self can not stand.

To be fair, you do tell a lot of it like it is. And it could be costly if you started whispering that word, that 4 letter word, "conspiracy." It really is 4 letters to some. It would not be fair to ask you to risk it all, but yet, nothing come but through risk. We are being controlled and it could not hurt if more knew that.

apollo has left a new comment on the post "On Going Hunting":
Jim RM,
I can’t help think that you are missing the boat when you do not recognize the sinister intentions of the elites in keeping Primal Theory/therapy in solitary confinement where no one will hear it scream. They know what they are doing. They are keeping the human mind and emotions crippled, disabled, and imprisoned, right where they want it all. We can not fix problems we can not admit or still attribute to innocent misunderstanding.
We need to call an ace an ace, and a spade a spade. If we do not identify it as it truly is, we, too have failed.        Jan 15 2012

Arthur Janov    Jan 25, 2012 09:07 AM Email reply: "Sieglinde is right; researchers are laden with a publish-or-perish ego-driven agenda. As one ex-researcher told me, the currency of the world is money; the currency of academia is ego morsels.

But let's give Dr. Bebo the benefit of a doubt. Epigenetics research is still new and he may not be aware of the epigenetic link. This is especially true of clinicians who are usually not aware of the basic research. This stuff has yet to go through preclinical trials before it reaches human trials. I'm having a hell of a time finding good human studies. As yet, they don't exist.

Sieglinde may be interested in this study, published just last September: The epigenetics link isn't yet establishe with certainty, thus the cautionary note, "epigenetic mechanisms may also be involved..."

Things move slowly in science, especially in the clinical area. It'll take a decade or more before the full impact of epigenetics is felt.

I submitted this but it never got posted. Near to Feb. 11, 012.
                        Emotions certainly can overpower normal conscious function and decision making. But I would say that this is good reason for why we should exercise and build up some restraint and control over emotions, whether that is training the stem or just enhancing the cortex and intellect. But whatever, most people’s restraints and controls are very undeveloped.

Been reading on mind control and programming multiple personality disorders also known as Dissociative Identity Disorder. Subjects are selected based on several criteria and one of those is susceptibility to hypnosis. Some are too hard to hypnotize. Some are easy. They like easy ones if they also have some IQ and ability.

But resistance to hypnosis (or torture) can be greatly enhanced by developing a strong intellect and independent streak, an ingrained independent thought and will. And undeveloped mind is very vulnerable.
Like it or not, most people do not have sufficient development of mind and thought. It makes us much more prone to being victims of all sorts of things, including our own impulses.

>> I deliberately referred to mind control and multiple personality disorder and its other name, too. These use the principle of PT in reverse. Torture, hypnosis and drugs are employed to split/fracture personalities in the mind. My suspicion was the Art was covering for these guys. I had asked about this as a question one time to Art. He said he would write something on it sometime. I did not believe him. But as well, I noted the usefulness of a good intellect and spirit of independence, which his own articles on hypnosis confirm, though he will not admit it.

Art is covering this sensitive issue up. I figured he has almost certainly come upon some who were once "programmed" and broke free to some degree and went looking for help. I'll be I am right, too! Art knows. Art just likes to lie and cover up for ruthless bastards.<<

Jan Johnsson               Feb 11, 2012 03:51 PM
You stated from the start, decades ago, that one of the supporting pillars of the Primal Therapy was that it is true democratic in structure and function.
Jan Johnsson

Arthur Janov               Feb 12, 2012 04:07 AM
Jan, I think Primal is truly democratic. We do not dictate to patients; they tell us. Our relationships is that of equals, not bigshot and underling. We don't contend to know what is inside patients and we don't have a secret language special to us. Art

Arthur Janov                      Feb 19, 2012 12:37 PM
Jan: I guess the principle I live by in my therapy and in my life is Self-Determination. Let people live their lives; do not impose what you believe on patients or friends. Let them come to the truth; that is the truth that sticks and endures. art

>> Wow, is it getting deep around here. "We don't contend to know what is inside patients and we don't have a secret language special to us." What, what, what? Are you serious? Art tried to tell me all the time what is inside of me and some of his fans do, too. He does it all the time. Further, he may not have a secret language, but Art defines and redefines common terms so that they do not mean what they might appear to mean. He is deceptive and tricky, using semantics to win arguments by trickery. Obviously, they did not work on me, but they work beautifully on his fans. Jehovah's Witnesses are masters of redefining words so that people do not even fully realize what they believe. Its called "substitution." Politics is great for this misuse of double speak. Offense becomes "forward defense." Art says he does not impose his beliefs on others! Really? You mean like his hatred for the intellect and religion? Or censor stuff so others can not hear it? Seems to me that Art makes all kinds of decisions for others. What a total and complete phony! Self determination means letting them hear everything and make their own decision. Art does NOT do this! You're gonna love this next one. I know I did!<<

>>I tried to post the following without success near to Feb. 12, 012. It happens all the time:<<

ME: Fritz Springmeier Deeper Insights (into the Illuminati Formula)

Type the 1st 4 words above into Google and find the book. You’ll know why some cover up PT. The reverse of PT has been known for decades before Art even discovered PT. Germans helped develop it and bring it along. They know more about the brain and manipulating than Arthur can dream of.

This is where the tires hit the pavement. Not for timid or easily scared people. But PT fans should see it clearly in the hypnosis sections, and related. You can avoid the political stuff though its hard to separate them. Lets see what you are all made of!

Elizabeth Loftus is one of those “evil” ones (my opinion). She is there to throw us of the track. What she does, I say she does it deliberately. Oh, what they are all hiding. Be afraid, be very afraid.
Or I like this one from once upon a movie time.” In space, there is no one to hear you scream.”

Oh, I’m just pulling your leg, of course ;-)

Arthur Janov                      Feb 19, 2012 10:44 AM
Jan: The reason I get infuriated is because it is the same with guys like Kissinger, an arch war criminal who is lauded as a savior. These guys are causing great harm because they offer help that can never help. It is criminal!! Art

 >>I tried to respond below but it was not posted. <<
            Me: It is most ironic that you complain of arch war criminals, yet you refuse to allow my post exposing what mind control programmers are doing in secret to thousands, many of whom are children. It was as if you were on their side. If you think it is booga booga, that is fine. Why not let others be judges for themselves as to what they think or do. Do You imagine yourself the owner of these people, like you tried to own a therapeutic principle? No doubt in my mind any more, who you are covering for and why. You re part of the problem, not the solution. I’m on to you, buddy! The truth will get out sooner or later.

·  apollo        Feb 12, 2012 03:22 PM
Emotions certainly can overpower normal conscious function and decision making. But I would say that this is good reason for why we should exercise and build up some restraint and control over emotions, whether that is training the stem or just enhancing the cortex and intellect. But whatever, most people’s restraints and controls are very undeveloped.

Been reading on mind control and programming multiple personality disorders also known as Dissociative Identity Disorder. Subjects are selected based on several criteria and one of those is susceptibility to hypnosis. Some are too hard to hypnotize. Some are easy. They like easy ones if they also have some IQ and ability.

But resistance to hypnosis (or torture) can be greatly enhanced by developing a strong intellect and independent streak, an ingrained independent thought and will. And undeveloped mind is very vulnerable.
Like it or not, most people do not have sufficient development of mind and thought. It makes us much more prone to being victims of all sorts of things, including our own impulses.

Arthur JanovFeb 12, 2012 11:15 PM

I have a new idea, Apollo and Anonymous should open a new school of therapy called, "JUST GET OVER IT." ART

>> Honestly, is that what I said directly above this post? Art was ignoring the subject and diverting attention by changing the subject and not ever well, either. I replied to him below on Feb. 18, 012, but he did not post it.<<

ME: There is a time and place for everything under the sun. That included times and places when we should just get over some stuff. You quote me right and proud. But I don't invalidate PT when I say get over some things. You do invalidate any form of get over it. Extremes are not a good measure of soundness, most of the time. and Capt. Courageous ought to know ;-)

But my main assertion was on the intellect, not getting over it. Yours has the appearance of misplaced emphasis. But better to confront that to run, isn't it? Run as in censor?

Arthur JanovFeb 28, 2012 05:42 AM

Planespotter: All the early analysts considered tales of sexual abuse a phantasy. art

>>I wrote in the posting box and forgot to copy/paste to save. I replied to the effect that therapists had long been covering for evil people. They are paid liars as so many scientists and academics are. Not posted as is usually the case. Art does not like suggestions of conspiracy, perhaps because he might be in on it himself.<<


The following is a dialog between Arthur and colleagues Bruce and Page on Science:

Sunday, May 20, 2012
A Dialogue About "Science"

>>They each ponder why science has not recognized PT up to this point in time. But it should be pretty obvious by now that someone does not want it to prosper and grow. They say "science" is blind. But I say, Art and company are also blind as to why they remained blacked out.

Here was my reply to this blog, but it did not get printed. <<

>> I marvel that you can all talk about non-feeling persons, as if they truly did not see or know about PT or sincerely did not believe in it. Why is it so hard to accept that they know full well PT is legit and for real. They are deliberately, willfully and obediently avoiding it and any direction going anywhere near it.

So when you argue that it’s non-feeling or the researchers themselves, you are as blind as they are deceitful, or maybe both sides are deceitful. Could there truly be something deliberately malevolent out there? Is that too scary for you guys? A little to primal for you to absorb so that you crawl back into a primal split?

It takes a big man (or woman) to face the horrible truth. We really do, in the words of a suicide character in “Full Metal Jacket,” I live in a world of shit. If you guys are so smart and so brave, lets so you face and admit that conclusion. Hi, I’m so and so and I am terrified of the truth of the sinister motivations of the world.

As I see it, primal promoters and fans are absolute and complete cowards. You want the truth? You can’t handle the truth. Oh, I love those Hollywood clichés.

Your friend as always, because I always tell you the truth, no matter how much it hurts me ;-) Apollo!     <<

>> So Art is afraid to publish/post, or allow my ideas to be heard. An accident? I think not. Innocent. Not as far as I am concerned. Art is scared (my opinion). He knows I am right, I suspect, and he can not answer cause he has far too much to lose and he knows it.

I then replied to Paul the next day in his post to this subject: <<

Paul        May 21, 2012 1:59 AM


We exclude our emotions temporarily (you don’t, I know. That part of the problem) to see if we can verify them or not by reason alone, even as Andrew describes above earlier. We still have and use feelings, but we also try them and test them, to see if we can be sure. Both Andrew and I would admit to being neurotic. Despite that, we can see the validity of PT.

You speak as if I or others like me (that might be 1 or 2) simply avoid feelings altogether. That is patently wrong to the core. In fact, I’d suggest I run on more feelings that you or many other here who have not had therapy, do. That is why I can have an acid trip on mere pot/weed.

I do not react to insults (usually) because I see through those insults with intellectual and feeling discernment. My ego is not threatened by long years of training it or it submitting to training of its own will. It is possible. And if I did react, Art would not allow it, anyway. Its only guys like you who have total freedom. You are not threat to anyone. I am.

A good intellectual process does not lead to intuitive results. It is quite often counter-intuitive and one must trust the instruments and reasoning, since they seem counter to intuition. They do not set off resonance with the stem.

Many long term hidden situations are full of extreme danger, but we do not know them because they are hidden and do not resonate with our normal immediate fear sensors in our stem. We remain relaxed and unaware of the greater hidden dangers. Only a careful search of reason and fact can deduce such dangers. If we do not discern these long-term dangers, we are in as much danger as if confronted by a lion face to face without a gun.

The intellect is extremely useful for detecting lies, deceit, subterfuge, and other sorts of clandestine activity. This is the intellect’s greatest function. It senses a kind of danger that exists on another level or plane, one not instinctual, gut, feeling or maybe not feeling entirely but maybe some feelings going off that we do not understand correctly.

Since you have not developed such an intellect, you really are not in a position to judge or expound upon them. Art says we are in great danger from our buried pain and I agree. But we are in another danger that can not be felt but is still there, if we use reason right. It, too, is as dangerous as those unconscious, unresolved feelings inside. Which one gets us first, is by no means certain.

Both are equally important and this is the major disagreement between Art and I. I say both must develop together in a hurry. If you can only pick one, take the intellect, unless you have pain beyond your ability to control.

Sunday, March 31, 2013
On Killing Pain

" There seems to be no recognition of emotional pain.  Since they cannot see and observe it, it must not exist.  I am especially angry at this attitude because when I had back surgery years ago, the hospital, St Vincents, had no serious painkillers on board.  Why?   The state medical board was afraid they might addict their patients.  So we suffered terribly.  This is because they had no idea what addiction was or its provenance."

"So someone goes for back surgery and the hospital does offer painkillers, why does he get addicted? Because there is still more pain inside: emotional pain. That has to be quieted too.   So he finally gets something to ease suffering he was never aware of before, pain from childhood.   And for the first time, since emotional pain is not recognized, he gets something that makes him feel much better.  Why shouldn’t he take that drug?  I know, because the powers that be do not acknowledge emotions.

If we could once understand that early pain persists, is powerful and drives us, then we could comprehend what addiction is.   It is the antecedent piece that is missing.  But once we do understand then we can do something about it, something effective and long lasting; we could remove the pain from the system at last.

We cannot treat something we don’t recognize so we repress it.  It will eventually kill the person prematurely. Those in power steal our lives; and they have no right to.

            I submitted this Sunday Night, Mar 31, 2013, near to 11 PM:

I agree 100%. But governments often pretend to know nothing when they have an ulterior motive and reason. I would suggest that the government knows far more in secret than they will ever admit in public. And they do have their reasons for denying emotional pain. I'll avoid the worst accusations, but give one of a lesser degree.

If they admit emotional pain, then they might have to admit they were the cause of much emotional pain and that, further, people might start wanting more laws to remedy pain and more research to stop pain from "happening." For those of sinister motives, pain serves very useful purposes in keeping minds from functioning well. We live in a very rotten world where deceit pervades nearly everything.

Arthur never posted it. Ah, seems he might be a bit afraid, wouldn't you say? Someone has likely forbidden him to let these things be heard. Now maybe you can see why I do not trust Arthur at all. He is covering for someone somewhere, it would seem to me. You can judge for yourself.

Back to Top

Jack Waddington    Jan 20, 2012 11:00 AM Art: To those of us in the world-wide Primal Community, we don't need all that neuro-science to assist in the validity of Primal Theory. For those outside of the Primal community, all the neuro-science from now till 'kingdom-come' will not move their opinion one jot (cos their opinion is based on inaccessible feelings they won't even recognize exist)

There is A NEED for a different approach. What that approach could be IMO is to way-lay all those notions of heterosexual relationships that make for a satisfying life (in the head) that often culminate in bringing children into the world either accidentally, or through some notion of it being an enhancements of the core adult relationship. No-one that I am aware of is promoting this approach of mine.

I will list my idea of a list that should be the "no-no's" to creating a child.

The idea that it is natures way solely to reproduce the species without taking into enormous consideration what happens to females on conception, that automatically starts a "love" for that creation.

The idea that making the female pregnant will enhance the 'two-some' nature of that core relationship. It won't, and never will; it makes for a different relationship which is becoming a 'three-some'; at least.

An accidental pregnancy should be immediately terminated ... unless the female become hormonally integrated into "loving" that creation and will, and is able, to continue it well into the ensuing childhood.

The pre-conceived knowledge on the part of the couple, or female that child rearing is TOTAL DEVOTION (slavery if you like) to that infant through many years of childhood as well as the nine months of pregnancy.

The 'normalcy' of current heterosexual relationships under this capitalist system we current live under. We're all perverted by it.


Back to Top

Arthur Janov has left a new comment on the post "On Going Hunting":

Jim: You know Eisenhower said it: you can never recapture the ambiance of war. To that I would add we can never recapture the ambiance of the early days of primal. Those were heady days full of optimism and hope. It took many years to develop it all and make it a reality. There were 60 people in group when john Lennon sent us his primal album and I played it and everyone collapsed in a heap, moved beyond expression. Of the psychological establishment sending investigators all of the time to investigate that I was making people scream and cry and therefore making them sick. We certainly did not know then what we know now but the theory was right just from the start. And now 45 years later we are still refining our theory and practice and do not waver. Art

Arthur JanovJan 27, 2012 08:12 AM Paul, We have begun the first steps toward important research on primal. hang on. art

Arthur Janov has left a new comment on the post "So Who Needs More Love?":
I love your idea of reading our own body and that my therapy is a reading school. Once you get connected to yourself you can read your body. art

Andrew Atkin has left a new comment on the post "So Who Needs More Love?":
Quote: "Primal theory alone has proven to be the profoundly robust theory within the broad spectrum of human behavior."
Exactly, and nice to see someone else stating it. By comparison the other stuff is not even theory.    Jan 25 2012

SWA has left a new comment on the post "On Homosexuality as a Normal Variant of Human Sexu...":
Andrew, I hear you.
But science and all decisions are made by people.
"population control".
I still shiver when I remember the words my father told me;
“We've got to have order and rules to save the Arian Nation and everybody has to obey by these rules - everyone else must be eliminated.”
Sieglinde        Jan 14 2012

On Suicide
Back to Top

Arthur Janov     Feb 3, 2012 09:47 AM
Years ago one of my staff said that suicide was logical given a ruined life. What do you all think? Art
apollo     Feb 3, 2012 10:47 PM
Oh, what a juicy question. Deep and challenging. Lets consider this. If you look back and see nothing but pain and no joy and see no prospect of any real change in the future, what hope or incentive is there to go on? This is a purely logical analysis. Bu we are not purely logical. We have that drive/will to live, against almost any odds. That makes us keep going when logic would suggest it is not worth bothering.

If there is no hope for the future, no pot of gold at the end of the rainbow, then any sane person might say, game over! I am out of here!

I have often thought that suicide might be the result of the intellect finally winning out over irrational desire to live or keep struggling. My brother was a possible suicide. But his parents made him think he was the only thing that mattered and he was great just because he was him. His ego went sky high. But when he could not live up to that image, he drank till he died. He had messed his life up so bad there was no point in continuing. I agree with his conclusion. He never asked but I read behind the lines. He was in TX anyway and I was in ME.

I know the theory that pain makes people kill themselves. Indeed, sometimes that may be the case. I am not so sure it is always the case. Hope is a funny thing. Hope can be quite reasonable or it can be completely irrational. How do we know which one it is?

Obviously love could make quite a difference, but love is a very rare commodity. I don’t spend much time worrying about it, since I have purposes and plans and a hope, too, to boot, huh? Love can wait or even got to hell for I care. It can often be an irrational hope.

Either one can find true legitimate hope or one that you can run after to make you keep going. The only (3rd) option left is to forget about hope. Then we advance to purpose and plans. But here is the strange thing about it all. No matter how you slice it, it does come down to one of those basic questions we all struggle with once in a while. Was life an accident or was it by purpose and intention?

I say that if one concludes it is an accident, then you can pretty much forget about purpose and meaning. If not an accident, then what the hell caused it and why?

I offer this one warning. And you can laugh all you want. Hey, I always wanted to be a successful comedian. But in not too much more time, those is very high political places are going to put on a show and say aliens did it and now they have come back to save us. Beware of false messiahs and liars and poorly written scripts, too ;-)

And don’t nobody give me any of that pain bull$h!T. Address my logic. Where did I go wrong in my chain of thoughts? Try and answer that, please, if you can and dare!
Richard     Feb 7, 2012 04:59 PM
paul, it's impossible to cry when you are overwhelmed by a first-line feeling. each rush of hopelessness hits hard and can make you hunch over and vomit (i'm not talking about a primal...i'm just talking about a really bad day). it's mind-blowing despair. the feeling is not caused by your present-day problems - most people's adult lives are not that bad. it is a feeling from the past. without a reality-based intellect, suicidal people may see death as the only real option. there are times when breaking down is not the right thing to do. it's important to remember where that feeling is coming from (the past) and to look forward, when you can, and find the little things that provide some kind of real or neurotic reward. being super-intellectual is ok if it stops you from plummeting into despair, but it's not ok if it stops you from getting to the primal center.

>>Richard has strayed far off the path of good sense here. Contradictions left and right.<< "being super-intellectual is ok if it stops you from plummeting into despair, but it's not ok if it stops you from getting to the primal center." >>So let me see if I got this right. Being super intellectual can be OK, if it helps prevent or lessen despair. That's new for Richard or Art. But its not OK if it prevents despair but makes you not bother with Art and his therapy. Why is that? If I can become functional without years of therapy and thousands of dollars, where is the problem? Art says that the pain will shorten your life. Well, not if you take some important nutrient supplements. But Art does not believe in those, either. Nor does he believe in conspiracies or much of reality, either.

But it is that statement about a neurotic reward that is disturbing. Richard is colliding with truth and reality and he does not like it. So now neurotic retreat is OK. Look how Art responds to this next!<<

Arthur Janov     Feb 8, 2012 04:48 AM
I couldn't say it better myself. art

>>I wrote: but it was not posted. Art likes censorship.<<
So now a neurotic reward is a good thing? Unrealistic hope to be pursued with passion? How far can we go before we go off the deep end? A quagmire, no?

I do not agree that all pain is mostly 1st line and old. Much pain can and does come from the present, which then resonates with the past. Pain of the past can be much more overwhelming if we ignore what we are doing in the present. Our original pain was overwhelming because we may not  have been prepared or equipped to handle it. But the present offers enough coping skills that we should be able to correct present deficiencies, if there are any.

One can not criticize super-intellectualism unless one has achieved that, to know what they are criticizing. Especially so, when the super intellectual is not suffering at all consciously. There is something to be said for that, since you yourself said neurotic rewards are OK. OK then.

>>Yet Arthur responds elsewhere later this way next:<<

Arthur Janov      Feb 19, 2012 10:42 AM
Offering false hope is hurting people. It is criminal. art

 >> To clarify, a false hope, as we have been discussing in suicide, is here, according to Art, hurting and criminal. Of course, he was not referring to suicide here, but suicide is a good example of why false hopes might save lives at times. Richard even said it and Art agreed, right? But in general, I agree that false hopes are hurting and criminal. This is why I fault Arthur so much, because he creates such high expectations for his therapy that many do not achieve and felt let down. He tells you about the good cases of success but neglects the others as if they never happened. There are those who seek all sides who know what happened.

So Art now renounces what he said to Richard and says false hope are bad. That brings us to our next problem. I tried to post the following below but as usual, it did not get accepted and posted by Art.<<

ME: And who is it that judges what is a false hope and what is a real one? Can people decide for themselves? Should they be responsible for themselves or should they lose control and decision making and be forced to be "protected" by someone else who knows far better than they do? We are dying to know ;-)

>> Did I mention I can be sarcastic? Its the result of my self-practice of reality therapy ;-) <<

Andrew Atkin        Feb 17, 2012 01:56 PM
If Richard J. McNally cannot recover repressed memories, then how can he know whether or not they are there? Very ambitions to use the term "folklore" in something he does not and cannot know anything about.

And you are right, Art. He does have a stake in denying repression. Otherwise he would be calmly agnostic on this issue (like a true scientists), rather than taking an emotive/definitive position on something that, again, he simply doesn't really know about.
-Often you can smell the b.s just by the 'strangely' inappropriate reactions to the issue.

>> What I get a kick out of here, is Andrew's attitude, which is correct, but different from what he has said in other places. If McNally has not the experience, then he can not criticize. I have often said this to many on this blog of Art's. But they criticize what they do not know, as well. Hypocrites! Andrew says McNally should be neutral on something he knows nothing off. True! But this is the typical way scientists respond, for they all have "stakes" in denying whatever it is they they so often deny. They are paid "security guards" of knowledge and anyone deemed not entitled to it will be told lies such as "there is nothing to that." Love this next part: "-Often you can smell the b.s just by the 'strangely' inappropriate reactions to the issue." >>Amen! If only Andrew could follow his own advice. As well, his suggestion, to me, points right at Arthur, whose reactions are often inappropriate to the issues at hand. Especially that censorship button he has.<<

Arthur Janov      Feb 19, 2012 10:35 AM

Andrew: Elizabeth Loftus is another one who has made a career out of denying recovered memory. Remember our pledge: first do no harm. What they do first is........harm. can you imagine dedicating your career to denial and harm. It is what parents do when a child claims to remember something like incest. And it is what psychoanalysts did when patients claimed incest. They think and thought it was a fantasy. You are right, why are they so vehement except it makes good copy.? art

>> Listen, Art is right here. Loftus belongs to the Skeptical societies and has been published in the Skeptical Inquirer. I have read some of her stuff in that journal and Psychology Today as well. She is there to hide privileged knowledge from us little people so we do not become smart like they are and remain ignorant and east to fool. In my opinion, she is not to be trusted nor is the Skeptical Inquirer. They are closely aligned with very question political agendas. Truth is not their main concern and never has been, as far as I can tell. Art does not address political associations or motives of serious question. He should.<<

 Richard         Feb 17, 2012 08:57 PM
.  .  .  What type of evidence is he (McNally) looking for? He might be smart enough to know that a lack of CONVINCING evidence is not a good reason to completely ignore all of those who are convinced by the evidence. He might be smart enough to know that the quality of a patient's subjective experience is impossible to document with irrefutable evidence....therefore, the inherent difficulty in supplying CONVINCING evidence should be expected, and this difficulty should not be considered sufficient grounds for dismissal.

>>I tried to reply but it was censored:<<
Me : You pointed out well the problem with what is convincing evidence. Laws and Courts accept eye witness testimony as valid and reasonable evidence, which is why fake scientists avoid eye witnesses and disparage them. They are up to no damn good. Liars and frauds. The handwriting is on the wall, if any have the courage to listen.

Arthur Janov      Feb 19, 2012 10:26 AM
An email comment: "This is hogwash! This "esteemed" Harvard professor has himself never made contact with his own subconscious. Therefore, he is drawing such conclusions on the basis of his own repression. I feel angry right now. In fact, enraged and frightened.

>>What I get a kick out of here, is how or why the professor is wrong. He never made contact with his own subconscious. Really? I know many incredible scientific discoveries and great investigative work, too, all coming from neurotics. Being in contact with the sub-conscious does not have to be an obstacle. This is a typical response of Primal fans. Very typical! What should be done is to show how and why the investigation was flawed and never sincere, either. there was no real investigation of the subject and McNally was, in my mind, a fraud, like most scientists, when speaking publicly or writing publicly. Primal fans never address the evidence or reason. It always comes down to hidden repressed pain. They have accepted Arthur's bullshit without serious question, just like they had been doing their whole lives. They have learned nothing about Primal Therapy and being independent. They still depend on daddy to tell them what to think and who to vote for. I replied to this post, censored as usual.<<

ME: To: An email comment
I have never been in contact with my own subconscious, at least to the extent that Art defines and requires, yet I saw and believed in the validity of Primal Theory. So that is no excuse and never has been.  The so called scientist is a fraud. Call an ace an ace and a spade a spade. He is what he is. When you justify with the poor excuses, you join him in his conspiracy and a conspiracy it is! Make no mistake about that !

>>I also responded with below but was denied posting:<<

"Its pretty horrible to think that people like this have so much power in influence. Sandy"
Damn Right. It is monstrous and horrific what so many do in secret or pretend to do in the good name of science, which has become a 2 bit whore. And I apologize to all whores for sullying their name when they deserve far better than to be linked with “scientists.”

This Just In!
Back to Top

On Murder and Being an Intellectual

Posted: 26 Jan 2012 11:26 AM PST

Are they related? Are you kidding? Somehow I think they are. It started the other day when I was discussing with a colleague about a very smart scientist we know who has got into booga booga and how ‘we live in a parallel universe but don’t really know it”…blah blah. I was going to send him a piece that I wrote about booga booga, and then decided against it as a useless, vain attempt. He couldn’t hear it. Then I thought about the guy in Norway who killed 60 people in a murderous rampage. Nothing could have reasoned him out of it. Neither my killer or my intellectual could be reached. They were locked into an idea that was unshakeable. The left brain was being crowded out by massive right brain input.

>> Did you notice the complete contradictions above? Locked into an idea but then he says the left brain, where allegedly ideas come from, was crowded out. We might say it was disabled. But I assure you, Arthur either does not see the contradiction or he wants to avoid seeing or admitting it.<<

Well, you might say, the Norwegian surely knew right from wrong so he was clearly sane. I mean he could decide on what guns to use and what ammo; what ferries to ride and made a whole series of “rational” decisions. Yet he killed at random. He wasn’t mad at anyone; he was just plain angry and had no specific target. He could not be reached; he was living in a brain that had no contact with his feelings, that absorbed a mountain of rage but could not connect. It was disconnection, dissociation, abstracted and alienated from one’s true self. He was being driven and importuned by his deeper and mostly right brain; beyond his control.

>> No argument above, but watch what he says next.<<

Isn’t that a bit similar to the intellectual who wallows in delusions and booga booga thinking? And he cannot be reached or have his mind changed? Both are victims of a deep and right sided brain that cannot connect. Both have rationales for their behavior and beliefs. These were not beliefs that one can be reasoned with; they had a force that first stops at a way station where complex and paranoid belief systems operate in the left brain, and then if the imprinted force is strong enough, carries the person into more complex bizarre behavior. And the point is that these strange beliefs live alongside perfectly rational thought systems, sometimes precise scientific beliefs. I attended a scientific meeting where one of the presenters said to me on the side. “I know you are from the hidden side of Atlantis. “ He wasn’t kidding, yet his presentation was unassailable. Clearly, there is a part of the intellect internally focused, that bends to right brain pressure, and another part that sees outside very well; the alienated self.

>> Art makes a carefully planned step here. An intellectual, so called, who is actually irrational and driven by primal pain. OK! But if he is driven, to the point where reality no longer has any influence over him, is he sane? Is he really an intellectual? By not distinguishing that a certain intellectual is actually nuts, he is going to, he hopes, leave us thinking all intellectuals are crazier than hell. Actually, if he wanted to suggest that a good 50% were, I'd go along with him ;-) But most intellectuals know what they are doing when they throw up their smoke screens. I suspect Arthur knows, too.<<

So what is the difference? Insane and not insane? If both harbor serious delusions, false ideas and irrational beliefs is there a real difference? One has thoughts out of control, and other has behavior out of control. We might say that there is enough cortical control left to understand that something may be irrational. Some chance to be reasoned with. With the Norwegian there was no functional cortex available; it was all submerged by pain. Pain became his total reality. Nothing to say, “I am overwhelmed by pain.” People had to die; his whole past flooded in at once leaving him no chance. It’s a bit fanciful what I am writing but it is food for thought.

>> I, for one, would not say the intellectual hypothesized had any reasonable or trustworthy cortical control left. And the Norwegian was definitly out to lunch. But Art did say something very accurate: "It’s a bit fanciful what I am writing."  I guess to hell it is. I'd say much of his writing now is a bit fanciful and not very well grounded in logic or rational thinking.

According to Art, science writer Bruce Wilson had this analysis of Breivik:<<

"According to the report, Breivik displayed inappropriate and blunted affect and a severe lack of empathy. He spoke incoherently in neologisms and had acted compulsively based on a universe of bizarre, grandiose and delusional thoughts."
"To the psychiatrists, Breivik described plans to carry out further "executions of categories A, B and C traitors" by the thousands, themselves included, and to organize Norwegians in reservations for the purpose of selective breeding. Breivik believed himself to be the "knight Justiciar grand master" of a Templar organization. He was deemed to be suicidal and homicidal by the psychiatrists."

Arthur: "He was clearly psychotic and a psychopath, but how different is he from Gadafi, Hitler, Kim Jong Il, or a host of other functional crazies?"

>>Damned good question! In fact, how different is he from any person of wealth, control, and power? We could add many more names there in that list. We could probably make a book out of that list, with just current names, nations, and businesses. Now pay very careful attention to Arthur's Step Two in his path of "logic."<<

The similarity between the psychotic and the intellectual is that they've completely lost touch with their right brain.

>> We had been focusing on Breivik, the psychotic. The intellectual! Is he referring to any intellectual now or is he still referring to the one at the beginning. It is not clear and that is likely how he wanted it. It would be easy to assume he is referring to all intellectuals, though if confronted, I am sure he would deny it, for he would know how stupid it would be to suggest all.

But he does say both "completely lost touch with their right brain." Lost touch with it? Really? I thought he said earlier that the left was overwhelmed and overpowered by the right brain. Now they have lost touch with the right. or maybe Art has just lost touch with his rational side. I don't know but something is seriously out of order and not making sense.<<

Like psychotic murderers, intellectuals are split from feeling; they resort to ideology rather than intuition, they support and uphold insane regimes (including the USA), they follow rules of logic rather than gut feelings, they miss the whole picture and focus on specifics, numbers, statistics, legal arguments, etc. Finally, intellectuals can easily justify mass murder as they did in Nazi Germany.

>> Now lets look at steps 3 and 4, boys and girls. Intellectuals has become plural. He is lumping them all together. Ain't that nice o him? All are crazier than hell, I guess. Well, Arthur is infallible, isn't he? So its got to be, right? You do know I am pulling your leg, right? Art says its our loss of intuition, replaced by ideology, that leads to insanity. Why, we ought ta kill all them thar intellectuals, don't ya think? Insane regimes follow rules of logic, rather than gut feelings, says Art.

Do you see what I mean. Art has now suggested that rules of logic and the intellect have taken over and ran the gut feelings out of power. A coup in the mind. You just read it, my friends. We went from right brain overpowering and disabling the left, and Art has said in other writings that the right brain is where feelings come up through; to the left brain, where logic is said to reside, where the left has taken over and suppressed good gut feelings. We went from being overwhelmed with gut feelings making us act crazy, to the left logical brain taking over and making us insane. More of that fanciful writing, me thinks!

So now, you should be thoroughly convinced that all intellectuals are nuts and that thinking is bad, and feeling is good and salvation. Never mind that the psychotic Breivik was overwhelmed with primitive emotions, out of control. Now lets get back to some sanity and rationality that actually makes sense.

Yes, people with absolutely no human compassion can be very clever and scheming. They plan and function with their intellects, quite well. It is either that they are cut off from feeling and empathy, what some call a lack of conscience, or they have simply reduced people to ideas, without feeling or compassion. I would call this a serious flaw in logic or one of function. The question to be answered is whether they can turn their conscience on and off, or is it just plain broken. I suspect both are possibilities out there. Some just flip a switch and others are just too damaged and broken.

But never let us conclude that these are truly intellectuals or that all intellectuals are like this. That is absurd. Many intellectuals are caring decent humane individuals. They are not overwhelmed by primal pain. They are in control, for the most part, as indeed, is the case with us all. We all have some contradictions and errors in thought. We are human with all that entails. But Art seems to want to take all intellectuals and intellectuality down. Its just that he is not very good at it.<< 

Peter Prontzos adds: don’t forget the common every-day delusions like spanking is good for children; blind patriotism is good and greed is wonderful. These are delusions created in the zeitgeist and adopted as true by most of us. Our social life, in short, creates our conscious awareness, in a way. I grew up working class. Thus the idea of crossing a picket line was an anathema to me. It was part of my social being, engraved in me. Physiologically, to this day I cannot and will not cross a picket line.

>> It would appear Art has had some help with this, eh? But a good point is raised above. What are called every-day delusions! We could just as easily call these beliefs, a word Art hates, I suspect; or we could call them thought errors. Regardless, we can change these without Primal Therapy. First, we have to recognize that we even have these scripts planted in our heads. We all have these. This is not what we could call crazy or psychotic. And Art and all his patients and former patients had them and still have some. No one is perfect.

We have step 5 now. Associate little things with major psychological disturbances. And you better grab that $6,000 fast and head to Janov's Primal Center or your head will explode and you'll die far earlier in life. But I say, why not fix some of those stupid little belief errors so that you can function better. Art says functioning better is not important, not improving, not healing, and not feeling. Art says a lot of things. Hey, give him a break. He is 86 now and might not be as sharp, if he ever was to begin with, of course.

Many people carry so many of these stupid silly little errors of thought and choice that they have had  their lives come apart. They could fix much of it with just examining what they actually think and believe, and then decide if those are really all that good or it they might be better discarded and better strategies adopted. All the primals and feeling in the world will not necessarily change any of those scripts we had given to us as we grew. so why avoid one or the other. Well, primal pain is often hard to get at. The errors are easy to get at, IF we are willing to get at them. Many prefer to run and avoid that.

But If you have released the pain, then you will still need to fix those errors. Not all fix themselves with the resolution of pain.<<

So here we have many schools of psychology which are only elaborate rationales for the theorist’s own neurosis.

>> See how easy it was to dismiss all the various schools of psychology? Just the rationales of someone's neurosis. Well, Art might be right. Maybe he is going the same, himself. Maybe his theories are just rationales for his neurosis, which seems very strong to me. Art says getting rid of pain is the ONLY solution. It is a good solution and one you ought to get if you can afford it. But not essential and not the only solution, either. That is the smoke screen and delusion of Arthur. I am going to use an Arthur trick. I am going to redefine "therapy," but only for this next line. Therapy other than feeling therapy is now therapy, period. I think Arts needs some serious therapy. Therefore, you might conclude that I think Arthur is nuts. Well, you can think whatever you like. I cannot control that. But Art needs a different kind of therapy right now. One where there is are more attention given to logic, analysis, and reason. Hey, it might improve that fanciful writing of his!<<

Arthur Janov    Jan 28, 2012 01:26 AM

Well said Richard but hold onto your letter and after the first 3 weeks of therapy see again if you would have written it. Therapy usually wipes away super intellectuality. art

Anonymous has left a new comment on the post "On Murder and Being an Intellectual":

Art, a few things. First, you use the term "booga booga" which I'm not familiar with. I infer it means bullshit/magical thinking.

Second, I don't really agree with you about intellectuals. Right now I work with a bunch of PhDs who are all hyper-intellectual. Most of them have PhDs in math or comp sci. I'm the only person on the staff who does not have a PhD. My impression of them, is that they are more empathetic than average. I will grant that they are more repressive than average in some ways. I also grant that hyper-thinking is a defense. But I just don't see any connection between intellectualism and psychopathic tendencies.

Actually I think people who are hyper-intellectual or overly intellectual, are more likely to have a heavy 1st line burden. They don't seem more likely to be the enraged/abused type who now wish to hurt others.

As for the intellectual who "wallows in delusions". There are lots of non-intellectuals who wallow in delusions. I'm not even sure that intellectuals are more likely to do that. I know a lot of people who see conspiracies everywhere, and they're not very intellectual.
-Tom W        Jan 27 2012

Yann has left a new comment on the post "On Murder and Being an Intellectual":
Well Richard...from what I've learned if a psychotic kills someone, it's a mere accident which is not the case for a psychopath. It's not just semantic in a justice court, for instance. The psychopath has the cognitive ability to plan what he wants to do.    Jan 27 2012

>> I find 2 types of psychopaths. One if very intellectual, crafty, smart. The other is compounded. Treacherous and contradictory, as psychopaths can be, but he is not smart, either. He does not read people well, if at all. He is totally ineffective and never trustworthy. He can be a dangerous nuisance but never get out of his own way. Get rid of him fast, but it is doubtful that he can do much harm if you are on guard. He has multiple problems that lave him totally useless.<<

Yann has left a new comment on the post "On Murder and Being an Intellectual":
The psychopath doesn't feel his own pain. On the contrary the psychotic suffers so much his thinking brain is overpowered by pain. The psychotic is the "regular lunatic" everyone would recognized but you could trust a psychopath without being aware, that's why they are much more dangerous.
Jan 27 2012

SWA has left a new comment on the post "On Murder and Being an Intellectual":
“Therapy usually wipes away super intellectuality.“
Dr. Janov, Oh noooooo!!! Please don’t tell me that my 50 years strive, in becoming an intellectual (I still have a long way to go), are wiped out by JPT????
Oh dear, will I unlearn all my hart inquired tough defensive speeches? Will I regress to the emotional tear full child I once was? Just kidding ;-)      Sieglinde        Jan 28 2012

Arthur Janov has left a new comment on the post "On Murder and Being an Intellectual":
Sieglinde, I am discussing the retreat to the left brain unconnected to feelings on the right. Being smart is fine, being intellectual is not. Get it? art        Jan 29 2012

>> Did you catch Art's bullshit attempt to wiggle out of all this. Evidently, we are supposed to believe that his definition of "intellectual" is different from being smart. I do not ever recall him making distinctions or defining between those. In short, I think he has stepped into a big pile of his own dog's do-do. Art hates the intellect, smartness, logic, reason, and anything related to any of those, because they expose him for the charlatan I believe he is.<<

Andrew Atkin has left a new comment on the post "On Murder and Being an Intellectual":
Tom: I have suggested elsewhere that schools (that support the development of common-brand intellectuals) are best suited to people who have lots of first-line pain (giving us the "nerds" as they are unkindly called), but have nonetheless had a stable childhood.

The result? Lots of pain to be repressed and released through hyper-intellectual acting-out, but a stable defense system due to the virtues of their stable home life, in turn allowing them to function "well" and be productive as adults.
But of course I can't be certain of all that. It's just the way it appears to me.

-Our idea of mental sickness is based on the quality of the defense system - not the quantity of the pain. This is probably because mental sickness definitions are based on what is best for society, and not necessarily what is best for the individual.        Jan 28, 2012

>>Andrew gets it part right here. It you are not crippled with pain, you might end up quite functional. It can be done even with great pain. But if the brain is somewhat damaged, it is not likely. In fact, it is not likely in any situation, primalled or not! But notice that even with this, Andrew declares one being hyper-intellectual to be an act-out. Act-out? How about survival and coping with internal mental pain? It is an act-out if it is not effective or useful. If it is useful and effective, it is an excellent skill to have and strategy to employ. They still hate the intellect. Can't escape that conclusion.

Andrew mentions mental sickness or absence of it, is measured by the quality of our defense mechanism. Defense mechanism? How about learning effective responses to situations, and developing sound long-term responses and an understanding of the world that allows one to navigate through it effectively? To Janov and company, the intellect is nothing but bad, a defense mechanism to be dismantled entirely and thrown away. In a perfect world, that might be fine. But we live in a nasty world so we might still need some defenses. Can you imagine a solider in battle, throwing off his armor or leaving the safety of his defensive shelter for the open field and not taking any ammo, either? Defenses are there for a reason. They are not entirely bad. They do serve some useful purposes. Parts of them could be fixed or adjusted or disposed of, but not everything.<<

SWA has left a new comment on the post "On Murder and Being an Intellectual":

On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 6:13 AM, swa wrote:
You say, “The psychopath doesn't feel his own pain. On the contrary the psychotic suffers so much his thinking brain is overpowered by pain.”
I do not agree.
In my opinion the psychopath has no 3rd or 2nd line feelings. They act out (unaware of it) a non-verbal first line pain. There is a disconnect and often the problem is in the Corpus Callosum (an MRI would prove this point).
Yes, they have overwhelming underlining pain but they don’t know it. If you ask the psychopath, how are you, their answer is either I’m fine, or they express anger and disagreement by redirecting upcoming pain to an unrelated subject.
A psychopath is not a “regular lunatic” and they are often highly intelligent but they are unable to relate (feel) other people’s emotion. They are agenda-driven and disregard the immediate life around them.

They are passive aggressive, lay (lie?), manipulate, control and redirect daily family life for their own liking, by sabotaging the daily rhythm to conform to their agenda. They are often displaying fanatic or one-sided and unfounded opinions. They also make very rarely eye contact.
Their field of interest is very narrow and show only emotion when watching (just as an example) football (emotional unrelated). At the same time they can have an extensive knowledge in one area. I know someone who is a walking dictionary, knew every football player alive or dead, but shows the typical “emotional empty eyes” (missing emotional expression) when a person or an animal is in pain. After a long (several years) you find out that everything a psychopath says or does, is fake.

We might consider, from an analytical point, dividing the psychopath from a person who has Asperger syndrome. At a first look, the outward signs, are very similar.        Sieglinde        Jan 28 2012

>> Notice them battle over the differences. Let me show you the real differences. Psychotics are totally gone, but even then, can be brought back. But Psychopaths have simply learned to shut off feelings or turn them on at will. They just flip a switch in their head and they are all set. They can be horrendously cruel because they do not care, or they can be warm, loving father and mothers, relatively speaking. A contradiction? Of course! Integration and consistency are not important to them. They resist these. They can even form splits in the mind or wall off certain sections or functions. The mind is a powerful thing and it can be extreme in its chaotic state of contradiction and selfishness. Primal fans have not figured that out.

What SWA elaborates on, does not contradict what Yann said. Yann was correct, though brief. I would add, though, that psychopaths feel their own feelings, they just do not have any for others. The empathy mechanism, as I call it, is flipped on and off or is shut of or is totally damaged and off line, does not work.<<

Paul has left a new comment on the post "On Murder and Being an Intellectual":

Hi, Yes, the poor old intellectuals often get a bashing and thrown in with the rest of the nutters (other 'types').
How does one classify different personality types? There are a few systems. By the way Jungs' is the most out of date IMO.
I can be very intellectual sometimes but that's not my main type.

Some of the sweetest loveliest people I know are certainly the intellectual types but they have all become 'aware' of their 'bias' of their tendency to retreat into their left brain as a defence. These are willing to come out and show feeling.

The sign of the hardened intellectual is in three chronic behaviour patterns they themselves have not identified as a hubris,
1: Gathering & Withholding information as a control mechanism.
2: Adopting an 'either / or' mental attitude or in other words a 'combative mental approach' (think of the lawyer in court, anything can mean anything as long as winning the argument is the outcome) and
3: Re-framing historical events, ie, bending the truth, chameleon opinions etc.

>> Paul brings up some very good points here. I will reduce it. he shows the traits of dishonest intellectuals who have bad motives and agenda so they twist and distort. These are sophists. They do not care what is right or wrong, but only care about wining an argument. A real intellectual, on the other hand, cares only about getting it right, not winning a battle. He can still be combative because he is passionate about truth. And those not up to the challenge, resent this determination.<<

Anonymous    Jan 27, 2012 06:23 PM
Art, a few things. First, you use the term "booga booga" which I'm not familiar with. I infer it means bullshit/magical thinking.

Second, I don't really agree with you about intellectuals. Right now I work with a bunch of PhDs who are all hyper-intellectual. Most of them have PhDs in math or comp sci. I'm the only person on the staff who does not have a PhD. My impression of them, is that they are more empathetic than average. I will grant that they are more repressive than average in some ways. I also grant that hyper-thinking is a defense. But I just don't see any connection between intellectualism and psychopathic tendencies.

Actually I think people who are hyper-intellectual or overly intellectual, are more likely to have a heavy 1st line burden. They don't seem more likely to be the enraged/abused type who now wish to hurt others.

As for the intellectual who "wallows in delusions". There are lots of non-intellectuals who wallow in delusions. I'm not even sure that intellectuals are more likely to do that. I know a lot of people who see conspiracies everywhere, and they're not very intellectual.
        -Tom W
Arthur Janov    Jan 28, 2012 01:23 AM
Tom, you may indeed be right. AJ

>> And that means that AJ might be dead wrong, too. Again, lovely contradictions in that Art rips the intellect and then indirectly says he might be out of line. The laughs never end.<< 

Anonymous        Jan 31, 2012 04:47 PM
Let me add here , now that I am thinking about it, that there was a lot of intellectual-bashing in alternative psychological and spiritual circles over the last 45 years, and that is something we must guard against ("You're in your head!"). As someone who was very intellectual (and got bashed), and also went eventually to the other side and got upset about the guardedness, verbality, and dullness of some intellectuals, this criticism applies to myself also.

>> Ah, Marco and I have had our differences, but I suddenly like him here. He makes very valid points, too. But very few who read this blog will listen to this comment. But they should. Marco nailed it.<<

apollo    Feb 1, 2012 08:31 PM

Marco, you stimulated some thoughts for me on mentioning contradictions in education vs. beliefs. This is not aimed at you but to all. As noted by others, psychopaths can kill or order killing yet have great love for their own kids, sort of, at least appearance wise and superficially.

Many psychopaths can simply flip a switch and feel or not, it would appear. It is somewhat like this with degrees in college. Degrees are nothing more than certifying that you will believe and do as you are told. No logic taught, no independence allowed. Education is a fraud and has been for over 200 years now.

So when people embrace silly beliefs or irrational ones, and those are not limited or exclusive to religion as some would have you believe, they are doing so because something in those beliefs appeals to them, likely on a 1st level feeling. Is it compatible with education? Of course it is. Education forbids you to think outside the box and beyond what is authorized. Just hear and obey, or else! How are they any different, really?

I notice people who assume that education and science are infallible and always presented with good motives. That is the big lie. They are just politics. Politics just wants you to go along with the plan they have devised. Most education is a waste of time. Education need to be pursued independently, to avoid political pressure. Most people are afraid to do so.

Religion does not have to be irrational. Just logical. Most religion, like most science and education, is politicized and irrational. Ah, but many here do not like that idea that everything is political, in control, and irrational, too, since it ignores the individual and his thinking and needs. I do not ever see this confronted admitted here. I see prejudices and false accusations instead. And no logic, either. The fruit does not fall far from the tree, some say.

It takes a lot of courage to dare examine our own thoughts and belief systems. Easier to find fault with someone or something else external.

Arthur Janov said...

An email comment: " "Love, work, and knowledge are the well-springs of our life. They should also govern it."
- Wilhelm Reich"
     December 19, 2011 3:55 AM

>> I think this one could have come from Marco, who posts as Anonymous though he often puts his name at the end. He is a Reich fan, which is not a bad thing to be. He quotes Reich, who identifies knowledge (another word for intellect) as a well-spring of life and that is should be a part of what governs life. Well, Art does not go for that stuff as you can read throughout this article and others. As well, in February, myself and anonymous took a slap from Arthur as being "just get over it" fans. We are not that, necessarily, at all. We do favor an intellect as part of the whole and healthy human being. Art does not. He might say otherwise, but he is just lying you as I see it.<<

It is Simple
Back to Top

Paul    Jan 30, 2012 11:40 PM
Hi Jan & All,
I have condensed Arts' entire body of work to the following words ('précis').

Repression (through epigenetics) is our naturally evolved defence mechanism against trauma.
Suppression (through various beliefs, distractions & drugs) is the maintenance system of it.
Oppression is the collective family, social & cultural consequence.
Depression & Anxiety is the inevitable consequence in the individual.
Through acknowledging these 4 stages and accessing their historical impact on us (in reverse order) we can 're-live' the trauma and 'un-cook' the set points.

In no way do I mean to trivialise Arts' work but really, the basic premise is not complicated is it?
Paul G.
Jack Waddington    Feb 2, 2012 02:18 PM
I would like to corroborate this last comment of Art's from my 'subjective' point of view. After many years of therapy I can now feel, even on my own. Since I now find it 'relatively' easy to allow my feelings to rise and then express them 'relatively' simply. For me, my old feelings come up willy-nilly as I go through life (sometime even once a week) and I am now able to easily allow myself to express them (mainly crying). It is so incredible to me how little stress I feel and, this to me allows for the feeling to rise and for me to express them. I don't doubt that I have some defenses left, but for the most part, allowing my body, and not my head, to go into it is such a great, great asset.
As I stated this is just my current SUBJECTIVE view.

The Science of PT
Back to Top

Skipping Steps The Untoward Consequences of Cross-Dominance (Part 1/4)     Posted: 24 Feb 2012 12:24 AM PST

Below you will find a 4-piece story of Frank. He has had a horrific history, which he explains very well and it shows the primal process clearly. My discovery of what was wrong in his brain goes again to reinforce the necessity for a rounded education for all psychologists. We need to understand so much of the human system, its biology and neurology apart from how to do the therapy. It took 72 years of his life for this diagnosis, which has radically changed his life in every respect. You will now read how that happened. 
 Dr. Janov

>>The patient suffered from cross-dominance of the brain. Simplified, it causes a lot of confusion in thinking and function. Art says: "goes again to reinforce the necessity for a rounded education for all psychologists. We need to understand so much of the human system, its biology and neurology apart from how to do the therapy." No argument about this. Indeed, one can never be educated enough is such a field. This has 2 implications.

1st, with such demands of the skill of a therapist, one should be slow to engage in a form of psychological therapy where so much can go wrong and so much skill is needed to go right. It is like surgery. It better be real necessary and important to go through with it. Otherwise, if one can find adequate solutions in another direction, it might well be the better course.

2nd, if one is in a real bad state, primal therapy, as potentially dangerous as it can be, will have to be done. A vast knowledge and skill will be needed. But clearly, no one started out knowing what was needed. Art made lots of mistakes and learned lots along the way. But if Art really cares about the science and treatment that he discovered (after some others but that is another story involving espionage and intrigue of an incredible nature), for the sake of that science/therapy and its continued development, he should publish his findings of the theory and of the treatment. All good doctors and scientists do this. But no, Art wants to keep it all a dirty little secret that only he can have or know. Its shameful!

I have had a problem with this policy since I 1st read it back in the late 80s when I discovered this Primal therapy. Finally I wrote to Art about it in 94.  The response from his wife was most disturbing. I'll leave it at that. It has no good excuse. Publish, if not in journals dedicated to the subject due to being rejected, then in books. Oh, he writes books but leaves treatment techniques out. So if he cares about patients, which I am in doubt of, then let him tell other therapists in their practice how to do right right and what to watch out for. Anything less is inexcusable.<<


On Being Non-Functional    Posted: 31 Mar 2012 12:31 AM PDT

That same resonance goes on all of the time, higher level deception can trigger off deeper feelings but those feelings do not get resolved and simply create burgeoning chaos and tumult. They do not get resolved because not enough of the less powerful feelings have been integrated as yet. The system is simply not ready yet. And that sometimes can mean pockets of insanity as the system struggles to hold back feelings or perhaps tries to make sense of them, but to no avail. Enough premature breakthroughs and we have frank psychosis, which is when painkillers are necessary. And those same painkillers can, paradoxically, make us functional, as the painful imprints are held down below, out of harm’s way. It is when the pain is so strong, so many imprints that tranquilizers can no longer do their job. So we have to titrate the dose to make sure the patient gets enough to hold back the input from inside. After more pain is felt the person will need less and less painkillers.

Those early pains broke open the gating system initially because serotonin supplies could not keep up with the demand. So what is in those tranqs? Serotonin. All the pills are doing is doing what the system could not do at the beginning because it ran out of supplies. And it ran out because those early life endangering events demanded too much of the gating system. Don’t be afraid of offering chemical help because the system is demanding—non verbal therapy for non verbal pains. We just need to understand and comply, and above all, to tell our patients what is going on inside them. We are only boosting repression for a time until their system can take over.
End of Art quote

>> Art has a good solution to leaky gates. Leaky gates prevent healing. They are a sign of damage from long ago. And this is expertise that can not be done by the individual in pain and you can not just "feel it," as one brilliant soul once put it. We need that skilled external help. But my real point is the last line, underlined. The drugs are only applied to block the gates from letting too much up so that higher level pains of say, the 2nd level, can come up and out before moving on to 1st line feelings later.

My point being that not all people in the world have leaky gates. Art treated many patients successfully without using drugs. That is because they did not have leaky gates. Functioning gates do allow us to do many things, if we wanted to. Many could, by hardly any do. Not all have the excuse of leaky gates. Not even many do, though many at Art's place might, because they can find relief no where else. Art attracts the most damaged people as a result.

My 2nd point is that in life, if all things are functioning well, especially the gates, then we, too, can "boost repression for a limited time" so that we can clear our heads and think carefully, letting our 3rd level intellectual abilities do their thing in our holistic long-term behalf. Art says it can not be done without full-blown total primal therapy and elimination of nay and all pain in the 1st level. That is pure bullshit! If we have gates, we can function in all areas. It will not always be easy, but it can be done if we really and truly want to do it.

I attempted to post this red reply to this. We'll see if it gets posted or not :-) <<

The Hidden Observer         New    Nov 20, 013
Back to Top


Janov's Reflections on the Human Condition: Wednesday, November 13, 2013  "The Mystery Known as Depression, Part 3/12":
"What is consciouness"

>> Janov discussed his long promoted concept of 3 levels of consciousness, which in loose broad general terms, is not a bad or inappropriate way of describing what is going on in the brain. However, when one takes into consideration the vast amount of evidence that exists in the books and other testimonies of MK Mind Control victims and those who have helped to treat them, the evidence suggests that in more complex and precise terms, this Janovian concept does not hold up entirely, if at all. My theory look better all the time, because I do not ignore a vast source of "data" in making my analysis and theories. I'll show you what I posted and then discuss it a little more. It was not posted. No surprise, of course. Too hot to handle! Ouch!

Truth1 as Apollo:
This model of Art’s makes sense, but yet I have some reservations about it. Having been reading much about the “Hidden Observer” (HO for the remainder of this post) of Hilgard and others to follow him, it Appears this HO is awake when our cortex sleeps, or seems to. The HO can interpret language and translate it to and control, the autonomic processes. It can totally embrace reality or completely shut it off and remain internal in its focus entirely. We might call this psychosis if done for the wrong reasons.

Placed under heavy sedation with barbituates, the HO loses language ability so that a stimulant drug must be added to barbituates that allow just enough of the right stimulation to keep language abilities while shutting down all other higher functions.

The HO acts as a vigilant super-fast protector of the active personality, what I call in each of us, our front desk receptionist that functions as our main consciousness/intellect. Now we can argue about names, but the HO is always conscious, super-conscious while the cortex can think and relay sensory input. But the HO can wall off the cortex from feelings, a sort of knowledge, and it can even dominate the “front desk” consciousness and prevent its partial or full performance. The HO can direct anything to be done and the awake front desk receptionist will be powerless to disobey and does not even have to know what is going on. It can be kept in the dark.

These hint of a control center much like the 2nd line system Art describes. But it also has data and evidence that might contradict some minor details of the Janovian descriptions in this post. The HO seems in control of everything. Whereas, the intellect 3rd line has no control over the other 2, 1st and 2nd line.

It seems to me that though there are the 3 departments Art refers to, HO consciousness seems to flow or stop through all 3 departments. As I see it, the 2nd line so called, the limbic/feeling system, may well represent much of that mediator control between the 1st and 3rd and maybe the whole brain. The 2nd line is like a big junction control center. I just throw this out as something to consider. The Hidden Observer phenomenon gives us much reason to reflect more deeply about our understanding and definitions of “Consciousness.”
End of attempted Post

Janov can not afford to admit the existence of the hidden observer, named as such by Hilgard. The hidden observer paints a different picture from Art's simplistic model, but worse, the Hidden Observer fully and completely supports my contention that the intellect is at the mercy of the 1st and 2dd line systems, so called, which Hilgard calls the Hidden Observer. What is unique about the HO. Despite it many similarities with Janov's 1st line, it has the capacity to grasp language or run it through an interpreter within the brain so that it can control all autonomic functions, considered by many to be instinctive, but what hypnosis and study of the HO show can be controlled and even over-ridden by the HO.

We can literally ignore all the sense that are pre-programmed to normally run by instinct, and the HO can create a false virtual reality of its own choosing or according to the instructions of a parent or a hypnotist operating on someone in a somnambulistic hypnotic trace. This "design" has possible benefits but also great potential for danger. I'll write about it someday.

But more important here at hand is what Janov reveals by not allowing this to be published. For whatever the reason, he fears this message above. It challenges some of what he promotes, possibly threatening his ego, which he might suggest can not be threatened due to his being all "primalled-out," so to speak. Its just elitist BS. But it may also indicate his possible fear of those behind MK Mind Control, to me a very likely possibility. AS I see it, this might be good reason to be weary of Dr. Janov and his ideas, which are incomplete and possibly in error, as I see it.

Of course the Psychological and Psychiatric Associations and Institutions do not acknowledge or admit Mind Control but that should be no surprise to those even mildly acquainted with conspiracy theories.<<


Other Practitioners
Back to Top

Arthur Janov Mar 27, 2012 03:39 AM]
An email comment: "Third, first, second, second and first, last! His laws are "iron laws." It makes a kind of sense, yet how in the world can this be done? According to him, his laws of treatment are the only ones. That bothers me. That is probably what bothers the rest of the medical community, too. AND a lot of other people."

Arthur Janov Mar 27, 2012 03:41 AM
and my answer: These are not my iron laws. I discovered some laws of nature that are unyielding. And what bothers you exactly? That there may be an answer to neurosis? It should be a cause for cheering. So what exactly bothers the medics? That there is an answer and a therapy that is effective? art

I posted this but Art would not allow it:

I think what the commenter was suggesting was that you only recommend your practice for PT, when he says “Your laws.” But I agree that there are laws of nature you have discovered and point out. But I, too, am just a little bit concerned with claims that no one else can do any good for anyone. You have found many solutions to many problems previously perplexing and troublesome.  So pass the discoveries along as any other profession does.

As for your promoting PT, that is great. But you have been rewarded for that, too. But I notice more and more of the “other” professed practitioners of PT are starting to put forth their ideas as well. But they are apparently more involved in the practice than in the evangelization of the therapy. That may not be so bad.

Yes, there have been those who were not as skilled as they could be. You were once there, too. But lets be fair and clear. No side to this issue has been without many failures. The problem is that no one discusses or admits failures or short falls. Often, it is not the therapy or therapist that is to blame. Many are not sincere in coming to therapy. You charge like $6,000 or whatever to make sure people are committed to the therapy.

It makes sense in some ways. But is it your responsibility to make sure they are sincere? I know it must be frustrating to work hard and have someone cop out on you. Frustrating as hell, no doubt. 1st line feelings coming up too soon is a problem, too. Leaky gates and extreme damage make it hard. You do not automatically deserve the blame for that. But neither do other “unapproved” PT therapists.

What would be best as I see it, is for all to discuss why therapy often fails. It fails for the same reason most do not develop a good sound sharp powerful intellect. But to worry that someone is stealing your “converts” or “disciples” is not necessary. I beg you, Art, to consider the example, whether just a myth or not that when challenged by one of His Creations, God did not censor the challenger, but let his try to prove his point, with in limits and parameters.

That is, let free open candid discussion take place. It can only be helpful. You can weather it and come out better for it. To run or hide or slight others who disagree is not becoming or inspiring. And if you need a good man of rhetoric and adroit skill with words and reason, I am your man. Far from humble, but on an open uncensored forum, I can not be beat. I’ll leave the humility for others ;-)


Arthur Janov      May 12, 2012 10:26 AM

Jacquie: I still cannot find a way to train competent therapists in less than many years. It is very complicated and therapists need many patients in order to learn about different people. We see people from some 26 countries and those cultures are very different. I prefer few therapists who know what they are doing than many charlatans. art

>> Now I ask, if it takes so many years to be a competent therapist, how available could the therapy ever hop to get? I say, this is the excuse for Arthur to keep it small and not flourishing. Why? I say, because someone has likely told him he can continue but must remain small by their wishes. So the plausible explanation for why it can not grow much is because it takes so long to learn since it takes so long to get your own feelings up and out. Its called a Catch 22. He could tell the world how to proceed and let the therapy progress, despite the failures. They are not Art's responsibility but he takes it on so he can claim good reason for keeping it to himself and repressed. He is the real suppressor and deny-er as I see it.

To be honest, I do not think PT should not be the first choice in therapy. My intellect/philosphy therapy is far better adapted, since it does not tamper with pain gates, which may not be working well at all. It is time to see past the good doctor Janov and see his smoke screen. I can see him as nothing but a phony, who is likely working for someone much higher, helping to hold PT back since it would be too useful to patients, if also blended with learning and reason so that people can see the big picture and long term view of things. this is what those at the top fear most. <<  


SWA has left a new comment on the post "On More Therapeutic Nonsense":

Dr. Janov and all,
Dr. Janov, can you explain to me what is the purpose of psychology?
I understand that medicine is helping people to get well (within limits) after they were ill, or even try to prevent illnesses and deceases.
Science has its rightful place in all fields, but what about psychology, therapy and psychiatry?
What has “common” psychology accomplished since Freud? What is the mission? Was some of the mission in the last 100 years accomplished? Were people healed? Has psychology or psychiatry healed or prevented any mental illness?
I want to find a legitimate reason for psychology to exist. After all, they do not allow you to feel – their purpose is control and diversion, numbing or managing pain.
Isn’t it exactly this that people in pain do all their life:
controlling and diverting, numbing and managing their pain somehow with something.
Is psychology a white Elephant?

ME: (it was not posted! By now, you should not be surprised. Janov has no answer to me. He has been outwitted time and again.)


>“What has “common” psychology accomplished since Freud? What is the mission? Was some of the mission in the last 100 years accomplished? Were people healed? Has psychology or psychiatry healed or prevented any mental illness?”<

I respond this way, SWA. 1st, is it psychology that failed or is it the patients that have failed? How would you prove that one way or another? I say it is the patients that most often fail. They go for the wrong reasons. Watch this!

Now I ask you, what about religion and politics? What is their mission? What have they accomplished in the last 100 years or even the last 1,000 years? Have people been helped by these, or most often hurt? Has either one fulfilled their stated message? Has politics, particularly democracy, brought good to the masses or has it been just a lie, while they beat the masses into slavery as they have for at least 6,000 years, or if you prefer, several million?

Has religion really elevated people and made them wiser about how and what to choose and how to behave, much like psychology is supposed to do?

All human institutions have failed us or perhaps, we have failed ourselves. The real lesson of PT is that few are able to find the holy grail of totally birthed out primals. So hard is it to do, learn and teach and guide in PT, that only a small handful will ever make it. We humans are very good for finding scape goats and blaming anyone but ourselves. You see it in religion. In politics, the current ruler always blames the previous administration. No one wants to own up. We are heading toward a disaster because of our flawed nature which seems beyond our control to help, despite the existence of all sorts of different “helps.”

No matter the school or discipline, the weak links are the participants of those schools or disciplines. We need to see the failure of the human species. But we only see what we want to see and hasn’t that been the problem all through our collective history?



Total Healing or Nothing
Back to Top

Trevor has left a new comment on the post "On the Difference Between Help and Cure":

Art, how could you disprove your theory?
It also seems "unscientific" not to have a control group. And competing therapies. Without that rigor you WILL seem like a kook to "experts."

Personally I think cognitive and behavioral therapies don't deal enough with emotions. There needs to be more balance in today's therapies. But then anything can be overdone.

On the other hand, it seems beneficial to exercise, listen to/play music, eat good food, dance, meet with friends, etc. By saying such things are, at best, palliative seems problematic. It starts a self-fulfilling prophesy. You believe you have to keep digging deeper because anything short of feeling the ultimate searing crucifixion-like pain won't least not much. But is there no wisdom to letting certain sleeping dogs/issues lie?

>> Art will say otherwise, yet he has also said that if you start therapy and start bringing up 1st line feelings too early, its worse than doing nothing at all. And how long will it be till you get to the 1st line or will you be able to afford it or have the time and circumstance in the future?<<

If a-non-PT person's vital signs are great, but you could say that's only temporary. On the other hand, a Primal Patient might reach the first line only to die of a heart attack soon after. Stress has been called the "silent killer." But there are many ways to deal with it that don't involve going to Californian...and then the womb. Like I've said before, there's a bit of perfectionism at work with PT that seems to preclude "good enough" living. I mean, how many people suffer simply because they were not told they WERE "good enough" and shown it?

I hear an echo of the "One True Way" that was preached at the faux primal place I attended years ago. It smacks of Catholicism's "original sin," AA, and other harsh "ways." They all seem too rigid for life and not a little cult-like. If you tell someone they will not be "saved" until they're baptized and they believe it WILL be true for them. Skepticism would then seem like a risk to their souls.

>> Trevor makes good points here. Arthur only allows for one rigid total solution. No half way solutions admitted as possible. Very Rigid! Very Cult like. Arthur would fit right in with the conservative Religious Right.<<

Who really knows what "the answer" is? Many take Bill W's words as gospel, just like they take the Bible literally. But even he was changing as he went along. He came to think that drug addicts could benefit from AA while originally saying No. And those who wrote of the importance of the child-mother bond came to see that other caregivers could be equally important.     Saying we're only free if we feel first-line stuff is complicated by the fact that you created the schema... offer a cure, but only at your workplace.

>>"Who really knows what "the answer" is?" Oh, Art knows the only answer! And we should not question him or disagree with him because he is a celebrity and authority by virtue of discovering PT first.<<

I'm not questioning your motives, Art. Just seeing problems. And sure, maybe it's just me and my neuroses. But the Scientology-like hype makes me pause. Tom Cruise and his ilk say that there's always another level to reach, for a fee. And the money-collectors keep moving the goalposts. So just when you think you're "clear" there's another layer of onion to get through.        Am I making any sense?

>> Well, being a religious refugee myself, I do question motives, for too many reasons to not do so. You should, too, in my opinion!<<

Arthur Janov     Mar 29, 2012 10:33 AM

Trevor: Letting "sleeping dogs lie" is the best prescription for an early death that I know of. Listen if you want to get rid of a tumor and you cut only half cause you want to let "sleeping dogs lie" does that make sense? Well, to take half the imprint and leave half of the imprint untouched will surely kill you prematurely. Art

>> This is easy to assert but not easy to approve. Do primal patients live longer? Substantially longer? All primal patients or just those who get through ALL their 1st line feelings? Art threatens us like a good preacher might threaten us with hell and damnation if we do not obey his words. How sad that he resorts to such tactics yet seems to abhor religion and/or God. As well, his threats might not apply if you do not finish the therapy entirely. Perhaps we should skip PT altogether if we can not do it all, as "daddy" demands. Or is that God demanding? I am not so sure ;-) <<

  Arthur Janov    Mar 29, 2012 12:27 PM

Trevor again: Listen, I found a way to take the pain out of the system; if people want to do it fine, and if they don't, fine. I am not a messiah, and my life won't change if anyone does it or does not the therapy. You see? About there being only one way. It is not my way or nothing. It is that I found a law of nature that is predictive and curative. How many ways can you make electricity? There are laws in the universe, and I found one. That's all.

>> This is very good slick wording but it does fall short in view of other words of his. It is his way, all the way, or you will die early! He ahs found a law of nature but he has ventured far beyond the boundaries of that law as I see it. He puts tremendous fanatical emphasis on getting all your pain, every last bit of the 1st level, no less. Nothing else will help, he says, by his definition of help, of course. A great spin-meister but not great enough for yours truly. I wasn't born yesterday, either.<<

Yes there are many ways to deal with stress. All of them palliative and none curative. But it is is palliation you want, then go for it. You have placed me as someone who exhorts and pleads to come to California, it is not the case. It is pain that makes people come, it doesn't change much for me as a person. I read science journals every morning and I love life. What can I tell you? I try to tell my readers not to gamble with the only life they will ever have, and explain my reasons the best I can.

>> 1st, he outright lies, as I see it when he says he does not lead for people to come to California. That is out and out fraud. He has said many times that you can only get legit PT at his place and that is on Cali, last I checked. Pain may make them come, but so does Art's urgent warning to go nowhere else. And my reasoning is that if this is the only life we will ever have (which I do not believe), then it hardly matters what we do with it because it will be over before we know what hit us. Just enjoy what you can.<<

Wouldn't you want to go the surgeon for brain surgery, who has much experience? Well, primal therapy takes years for our interns to learn. Why go to a phony unless you want to do what is convenient and easy? Well, you say, I never had the money. There isn't much I can do about this, except advise you to try to make it if you think it is worth it! And why blame me? I have printed warnings in every one of my books. This is a dangerous therapy in untrained hands. We pick up the damaged ones after they have gone to the wrong people.

>> See, he warns us again not to go to anyone else. That leaves only Cali, doesn't it? Now there are plenty of phonies, no doubt. But I suspect there are legitimate ones as well, outside of Arthur's approval. He does not address which are phony or not because he deems them all phony or illegitimate or at least unapproved. I am not buying that, either. He may (or may not) have more expertise, but that does not mean they are not unqualified or ineffective. If he knows that they are doing wrong, why doesn't he tell them or publish about it in a book like normal psychotherapists do.<<

Larry M. Jankowski has left a new comment on the post "On the Difference Between Help and Cure":

Why the masses remain blind:        People simply don't want a cure where they have to feel the actual pain that would have killed them. It goes against the system that saved their lives.        This is society on a whole. Because they were hurt so bad (or bad enough), they can never grow-up. They stay stuck in the mode and mind set of the child; the one that originally saved their lives. To do the opposite, for them, is to die. The real cure is their enemy.

My answer not posted by Art:

Larry J,               I want to add to what you said about why the masses remain blind, which I agree with, with just on minor distinction. Its always at least one, isn’t it, with me ;-)

We are in horrific fear of that past and past pain stored in us. It seems so monstrous and overwhelming. But some of us have had times where we faced fears and it was not as bad as we thought it was going to be. I used to be told as a small child that that needle would not hurt a bit, when about 8 and having my tonsils and adenoids out. When I broke my leg close to 16, it all changed. They were telling me it was going to hurt and I wondered why and how much. It was not very comforting. But it turned out the needles were nothing, at least to me. But I did learn over those two times that some nurses liked to jab and squeeze that needle hard and fast. It hurt some. If they went slow and easy it was nothing. So others can exaggerate pain, too.

But I think a good deal of the fear and resistance we experience is because of that ever so sensitive ego deep inside. I marvel at the hypnotist Erickson, that Arthur wrote of. To me, Erickson had an absolutely profound sense of the sensitivity of this deep inner, perhaps even hidden observer, the stem, where I think a lot of ego may reside.

The stem is accurately super sensitive. Erickson had the most wondrous way of wording things to try to avoid offending the stem and getting patients, at their very core, to go along with his suggestions. Even though they were hypnotized, he still felt they needed some convincing, perhaps. We carry this super sensitive child in us forever. We would be more like that child in some ways if the world was not hurtful and unkind. It is not really being a child, it is being safe to be very sensitive.

That super sensitivity makes us over-react to pain, fears, and all that other stuff. It makes them seem far more threatening than they really are. If we could get past that exaggerated build-up, we might dare to try more and once we had, and realized it was not as bad and we thought it would be and even proved to be quite liberating, etc. Nothing stimulates more success like previous success. I believe this is part of the problem why most run so hard from themselves. That stem is overly protective, even as our immune system can often over-react to irritants and cause allergies, asthma, etc.


Extreme Bias by Art
Back to Top

apollo has left a new comment on the post "Why We Must Relive to Get Well (Part 2/2)":

Emotionally dead? I think you give them too much credit, SWA. They are intellectually dishonest and misrepresent what they are really doing just as say, a spy working for a spy agency, pretends to work for some other cause which he seeks to infiltrate and mislead. You sent those books to mis-leaders. that is a nicer word for deliberate liars. they know what they are rejecting. They do! You perhaps do not understand what they really do for a living. They lie for a living. They try to keep us all in the dark. I am telling you the truth and one of the few that does. but the truth is not always so pleasant to hear. But I dare not lie, even if it makes me unpopular, which no doubt, it has. I have no problem with that. I knew what I was choosing.

Paul    Mar 20, 2012 05:05 PM
If you point your finger at an intellectual liar and say he's part of a conspiracy to hide the truth you are blessing him with the intelligence of understanding the truth. But the Primal truth is emotional and requires a different brain and different intelligence.        Therefore, don't go wasting your true feelings and insights on those who do not have enough emotional intelligence to reciprocate.

I prefer Sieglindes' remark: "emotionally dead". By various degrees and stages we are all at risk. If trauma remains repressed in us. Some have given themselves over to this without knowing it; the 'messianic professors' amongst others. If as a feeling person you meet one, you will know about them what they cannot know about themselves. If you reveal this to them, beware, some of them regard feelings as they would a 'bit of shit on their boot'.

My advice to all feeling people: "don't go being a bit of shit on an intellectual boot".

Least of all your own intellectual boot.        Paul G.

Under this blog post:
Thursday, March 15, 2012        Why We Must Relive to Get Well (Part 2/2)

I attempted to post this, no success:

Well, well, 4 people in unison. Too bad I put no stock on numbers. Never have, never will. Some slight the “intellectuals,” which is a poor choice of word to label them by, in the 1st place. 2nd, you use the word “feel” far too loosely. There are 2 ways on “knowing.” One is by feeling, the other by thinking. If things are done right, the 2 should end up in harmony. These paid liars do know that PT is legit. They use it all the time in secret. Feeling has got nothing to do with it. And one can also know right from wrong by reasoning, even if they do not feel.

But I can see you are all locked into a strict narrow paradigm that will not let you see anything to the contrary. Suit yourselves. Go on pretending life is wonderful and people are just blind and non-feeling. I know better. I know the SOB’s 1st hand. There are more things in heaven and earth than are dreamed of in your philosophies and theories.

You are a funny guy, Paul, but if fair even handedness were the rule here, Id give you a good lesson at the very least. You can be grateful I do not have the same freedom as you, ain’t that right, Art?

I then posted another reply, also not allowed by Art.

Oh, Paulie S, darling, I believe you should take careful note of the following:

Arthur >> What is clear is that so long as we leave one level untouched we can get relief from reliving on the various levels but not cure; because the traumas on the first line have not been addressed. Final resolution means reliving on ALL levels, otherwise we have only skimmed the upper levels, leaving the powerhouse first line untouched. That is, to be clear, we can feel real feelings with their real force from the second line, in the first months of therapy but if there has been first line trauma it must be experienced. If it has only been minimal it may not ever have to be addressed. That is rare, indeed. All in all, it is the difference between relief and cure. Lots of relief from second line primals but not cure.<<  

  My impression is that you imagine yourself suddenly cured or at the very least, an authority on PT and anything related. But your overwhelming sense of anger in your recent writings would suggest to me that you might have quite a ways to go. Relief you have, but not cure or authority. Nor is your anger really becoming, either. Just thought I would pass it along. It would be terrible to gain far more sense later and see how foolish you had been in the past.

Your posts seem often to aim at insulting rather than addressing anything meaningful. You might want to review them more carefully. Possibly exercise the gates and build some muscle in them so they can finally come online to help you out a little. That is “Dr.” Apollo’s opinion, only.

I then posted to Art, also not posted:

Art,         I fully agree that once therapy is started, it should be completed, if possible. But with years involved, one may not have the circumstances, such as money, or whatever, to continue as long as they might like. It is a shame that life is not longer to allow more of it devoted to self healing and growth. But we have what we have.

As well, it is precisely the fact that a REAL CURE is so far out of reach because it takes so long. Most will never get there. So we are talking very long odds. Given that dim prospect, one might be inclined to ask, what is the 2nd best thing I can shoot for. Relieving the 2nd line gives relief and that maybe as much as we can muster. But I do think we tend to severely neglect developing, in addition and not exclusively, the intellectual functions of reason, logic, and analyzing.

Sound intellectual info gathering and processing, for use in deduction, are often and usually Counter-intuitive, which is nearly the opposite of sensing/feeling, where such things are immediate. Counter intuitive conclusions are scary to trust but they are more trustworthy than “feelings.” But developing good skills of intellect does take a lot of time, too, just like getting to 1st line does. Not for the timid in either case.

Paul was likely contacted by Janov in my opinion, so that this came up in a different blog post:

  Re:Paul has left a new comment on the post "On the Difference Between Help and Cure":

I feel a bit tension about my previous comment, I can not read it back now but I think it is pretty attacking. Some explanation perhaps: after a good start in therapy here things went wrong but that had to with a medical condition and the organisation of the place there.        Result is that my top brain and perhaps also my feeling brain are very much in favor of primal therapy but my first line is against primal therapy. That is how I am in it and might explain my ambivalence.

>> What I want to point out is that anyone who wants to insult me is perfectly free to do so, whether Paul, Andrew, Richard, for starters. But I am not allowed the least ability to defend myself and put someone in their proper place. It is, in my opinion, Art striking out at me by letting others do so and denying me any reply. It has happened far too often. Art does not like effective posters. That is why he reviews every post and censors wherever he likes. He does not like or respect free speech and the reasons for it, would you not agree?<<

On Loving Yourself
Back to Top

Art starts out attacking 'loving yourself." It has many good valid points but it got a bit out of hand as others jumped in. There were some interesting things to note. The post is linked below.

1st, this: 

There is something lacking in human nature and my feeling is that you Art have encapsulated exactly what it is.
Where, as a species, do we go from there?


  1. Jack: I welcome all my pals out there to write about where we go from here. art

>>This strikes me as an insincere quest. While they ask to know and ponder, I don't think they would like the answers an  honest intellect might come up with, so they blind themselves to any meaningful answers. Isn't the human mind fascinating?<<

  • I have thought much about the 50's and 60s. I was born in 59 and was fairly conscious by 4. I remember quite a few scenes even when 2. But the world of say age 5, 1964, was a far different world than what was, just 15 years later.

    Talked to an old guy a week ago. He spoke of how you could leave our door open in the 40s, in Portland Maine, pop. 65,000 for over 100 years. Talk to anyone who lived in Portland in the 50s and 60s and you will hear of far more trust, safety, security. People knew each other and often their families went back for sometime. They grew together. Neighborhoods did not have people moving in and out all the time. There was some stability and change was much slower and less drastic.

    Many were the ways things were different, despite the crimes you mention. We are much worse now as a society and world. I could go on all day on this subject.

    Planespotter: It is obvious that you already know the answers to what you want to know. What therapy is that ? you can only trust a therapist if they are indeed primal. Steve Jobs made the mistake of going to a phony, thinking he was going to one of my therapists. He may have paid for it with his life. when you go to mock therapists your life is at stake. Don't mess with it unless you are suicidal. art

    Apollo: I remember those days and he was right. It is different world today, very very different. art

>>I quoted the above 3, because I did appreciate Art's confirmation of an observance I and many older than me have made. We have changed, and not for the better. Also, Art's warning can be quite appropriate, but also made exclude good practitioners as well.  There are many phonies in the world. Always exercise lots of caution and lots of research. And in life, there are no guarantees.

Anonymous begins the interesting part.<<

"Art, I love myself but I am certainly not involved in new age or in 'booga wooga', as you call it and I wouldn't allow myself to be insulted or rebuffed so flippantly. I have deeply primalled in the early 1970's, got floods of new insights, bodily, everything how I was COMPLETELY unloved. I was really experiencing it, nothing to do with cognitive shit!!! I love myself, not because I am crazy but because if I hadn't I would be dead by now. There was a man on an earlier blog who said he was hated by his family and managed to change his life after hating himself by loving himself and his children. He made a new life, primal or no primal, and I congratulated him. Perhaps you haven't understood, Art, exactly what I meant when I used the term 'self love.' ?? As you have never met me it may be easy to reach conclusions although I fully agree with all the religious self love positive thinking rubbish that prevails unfortunately."

Anonymous: Please inform me exactly how you love yourself. Maybe I am missing something. art

>>I think Anonymous did explain himself fairly well. He will  not let himself be walked all over and made to be unworthy and without worth. Art is going to use one of his specialties, a rewritten and unusual definition of a term so he can put a spin on it. Byut I got my own spin coming, as well. I know you can 't wait ;-)  Raindog gets it, though,next and Art replies to him, as well, highlighting what I said about "definitions." Ain't I the bomb?<<

what if loving yourself just means accepting yourself for what you are and taking care of yourself like THEY never did/could?

Raindog: OK fine but don't call it loving yourself since I have a strict definition of what love is art

>> Did you just see that? Accepting yourself and taking care of your self, respecting yourself, even if no one else will, says I, is not loving your self, according to Art. See, its not just me, is it? Love it something to Art, but only if  you primal. Acting without primal therapy is to him, utterly and completely useless. Primal therapy is great, but when he nullifies all else, then he goes way too far. I'm not finished yet.<<

  • i must pontificate...

    there is no such thing as self-acceptance, or self-love, or self-hate. those are meaningless intellectual concepts. we are what we are and we feel what we feel.

    if you think you have an ugly personality, it doesn't mean you hate yourself - it means you wish you had a better personality. you cannot direct a feeling of hatred towards yourself. if you have decided to avoid violent boyfriends, it doesn't mean you have learnt to respect yourself - it means your act out is becoming intolerable.

    you always did, and you always will try to take care of yourself, but you don't know how to do it properly. even suicide is just a failed attempt at "taking care" of oneself.

    neurotics "accept" themselves and they never accept a life of pain. they never stop struggling.

    what is love? love is a bond between two lovable people; it is a chemical reaction that gives each person the need to fulfill the needs of the other. it is not a solo affair.

    Richard: I cannot say it better than that. art

Here is my reply submitted Dec. 10, 2012, a few minutes back before 4 PM EST:

apollo    Well, Richard, I see your points but to me, they are a sort of word game in themselves. Thoughts and the intellect are often the results of those deep feelings. But as well, we are capable of thoughts, without those feelings, or in contradiction to those feelings. Feelings are one way of knowing, and thoughts are another. Both are important. You can love yourself or hate yourself. One can become conceit and delusion, the other can become a self-loathing. Are they not feelings, too?

We have 2 extremes to work with some mid feeling (2nd level) mixed in. Deep feelings on one end and deep thoughts on the other. Thoughts are often sabotaged by the 1st level. But if the 1st level is brave enough to allow the intellect to process without interference, it might be surprised by the often good results of the thinking 3rd level.

Lets look at it another way. When we are injured on the 1st level, it sticks and causes huge feelings and creates strong interference within us. Its impact can literally affect our lives and health. But here is the irony.

The intellect can also have a huge impact on our lives and outcomes. Choices we make can be a matter of life and death. But thinking will not have the same kind of impact that the 1st level does, internally. But each of those, the 1st and 3rd levels, can result in matters of life and death.

You and some others seem to completely negate any usefulness or power to the 3rd level. It was as if nature, evolution, or God, made a mistake in ever making an intellect. And so your run other feelings, labeled by some as self-love or self-hatred, as invalid. Whether truly real or not, and by whose definition or not, those feelings can be real, even if they are a result of an errant process of pain.

Too many words going on here on this subject and not enough thought on feelings. How’s that, huh? Word games produce little, if they start to belittle the feelings of some. Every feeling if valid in some way or another. Any arguments there?

>>Again, you can see the hatred toward "self love concept" and other such related new age stuff. I dislike it quite a bit myself, but I think the criticism went too far and got too picky. When we stand up for ourselves and demand some dignity and refuse to be treated as doormats, call it whatever you like, it is a good decision. If we feel unworthy inside, we only need know it is not legitimate, unless we can find objective grounds. If I had killed someone, then I would have good reason to look down on myself. but if I can find nothing significant like that, then the feeling of being unworthy is illegitimate. You call it whatever you like. You may also note what Anonymous had to say about my comment below:<<

A brilliant comment, Apollo. Brilliant!


Andrew AtkinDecember 21, 2012 1:48 PM    "On Loving Yourself":


The neocortex helps to block the real feeling and needs. But the lower brain centers create symbolic needs, which are a derivative of the real needs. The symbolic needs are acted-out with the help of the neocortex.

The neocortex said to the lower brain centres: "I will drive back what is real, but be your bitch for what is symbolic".

My reply, submitted Dec 23 2012,  9 PM EST and accepted finally.
has left a new comment on the post "On Loving Yourself":

Well, Andrew, let me say this.

The cortex can not feel. Did you know that? It is a completely different sort of brain function. It is analytical in nature, void of emotion, for obvious reasons, keeping the pain out while processing objectively to ponder the long term advantages as compared to instinct reactions, so fast and severe.

Those feelings that make us want to run, or give us dread, or whatever; those are what cause us to act or not, in regard to thinking. All 3 levels sort of act as 3 different functions. They have to learn to work together beneficially. That is the challenge before each human being, because natural reactions of 1st and 2nd are primitive and sort of dumb in regards to long term things. They have to learn, if possible, to let the 3rd also have time to weigh and analyze before acting in some cases.

Along the way in life, we have times when we realize it might be better to pause in our feelings and reactions and give some brief thought and analyzing to the situation. Maybe we think about it after we blew a previous situation and wonder what the better course might have been. We realize that maybe pausing to think first, next time, might be better.

After a while, the 1st/2nd begins to wonder about a lot of things that seem to contradict or interfere with better choices and advantages and begin to wonder if maybe they should make better use  of that 3rd level and figure out what is going on inside. It’s a hard lesson, but know this!

When we ignore the cortex-intellect, then we are vulnerable to hypnotizing and trance states. In order to get into a trance state, we have to ditch the intellect. That intellect can serve as a great protector, if we will only give it half a chance. But you are terrified that the all knowing grand poobah might not have everything right and you won’t know what to do, then, because you hate thinking for yourself and like to lean on and trust authority and celebrity. Many find it terrifying to think for themselves. They do not believe they are capable. Suit yourself.  


Arthur Janov has left a new comment on the post "On Loving Yourself":

dotJenna: As I say, I am fine with that. You may have found a way to feel better, and you may feel better. But to me, it is like an illusion, it isn't real because your underlying unconscious feelings remain the same. This is what cognitivists do. I wrote this article to show that unless you address the source, the change is only on the surface. art

>> Did you see that? Feeling better is an illusion and is not real. Those are not my words! Why? Because the unconscious buried pain memories and their feelings remain hidden, causing their trouble. Which trouble is the question. Those buried memories will cause physical harm over a lifetime. No Question or Dispute there! But if one achieves feeling better, functioning better, avoiding much more trouble and pain? That is huge and not an illusion. Arthur can trivialize so much that is so worthy. Honestly, how real can one be, if they can deny such accomplishments? Surface changes? If they change ones life and outcome, they are not surface changes. Art's clever re-definitions again. This is why I have come to seriously question the good doctor and his ideas. Such serious errors of thought are often indicative of other serious errors in one's theory and practice. Those theories and practice ought to at least get looked at very carefully. <<


Repression Kills
Back to Top


I started it off:

Frank, you bring up some interesting points. Yes, the intellect can intervene when watching a movie, because the intellect understands it is not real; that it is a forged presentation that sort of mimics reality at times or not. Movies and TV are illusions. But those illusions are very powerful !!!!!! Why? Because we see humans expressing emotions and moving. We hear the voices. We get caught up in the visual auditory display. It has nearly every appearance of reality on the surface. That is why Movies, TV, are such very powerful mediums. They can easily touch off authentic feelings.

But there is a distinction. Much of what those mediums display is not an accurate depiction of real life. People are not usually reasonable and see the error of their way. Good and justice do not always triumph. The ending is not always happy nor life realistically portrayed. In fact, we are fed many illusions and lies in those mediums.

So the intellect can remind us not to let ourselves get caught up in this phony presentation of life and philosophy. But for a child, without a full intellect, its hard to distinguish reality and truth from illusion and fantasy or even horror.

At 6 years old, the witch appearing in a puff of smoke in the Yellow brick road on the Wizard of Oz movie was absolutely terrifying to me. No trauma, but real fear, all the same. I ran up into the bedroom and hid on the far side of the bed. She really un-nerved me.

On the other hand, the real life of real encounters can and should evoke feelings and even lead to connections and primals. Our deep inner 1st line seems to prevent us from this, for whatever its reasons. But a good intellect should help us to discern real from “presentations” not so real at all. Of course, the 1st line may like the illusions and decide to shut the intellect off and embrace the illusions. The 1st line can be its own worst enemy, since its “knowledge” is just primitive feelings, which are memories and experience from that level. But hopefully, the 1st line can eventually learn that good things can come from an objective intellect, pursuing scary directions of truth, for a more long term advantage.

That is why some of us discover Primal Therapy, despite the conflicts of our various 3 levels.

Hi Apollo,

Mr Perfectionist here again:

-"Our deep inner 1st line seems to prevent us from this 
*1, for whatever its reasons. But a good intellect should help us to discern real from “presentations” not so real at all 
*2. Of course, the 1st line may like the illusions 
*3 and decide to shut the intellect off and embrace the illusions 
*4. The 1st line can be its own worst enemy 
*5, since its “knowledge” is just primitive feelings, which are memories and experience from that level. But hopefully, the 1st line can eventually learn 
*6 that good things can come from an objective intellect *7, pursuing scary directions of truth, for a more long term advantage"-.

You can rely on Mr Perfectionist here to pick up on the above and make 6 asterisks worthy of note:

1. It's not the 1st line that prevents access to Primal but repression (and beliefs) that prevent access to the 1st line.
2. The intellect alone cannot discern reality, it can only calculate and postulate. Without connection therefore, the intellect is not to be trusted to produce an objective view.
3. The 1st line cannot 'like or dislike' anything it can only react, it is the 2nd and 3rd lines that make inside us what we call desire. That's why babies and neonates 'need' total care and attention.
4. The 1st line doesn't 'shut down the intellect'. The traumatic registers in the 1st line drive the intellect to distortions in perception through repressed traumatic pressure.
5. The 1st line is never it's own enemy, that's the sort of thing Victorian poisonous pedagogues say; the enemies of the 1st line are always unmet needs inflicted on it by either uncaring and ignorant parents or by unfortunate circumstances beyond any one's control.
6. The 1st line cannot 'learn' anything after the critical window has closed at age 3ish; after that 'learning' can really only be a 2nd & 3rd line activity.
7. Good things can come from an objective intellect but that objectivity is really only 'expressed' in 'rational' ways by the intellect after connection. It is possible for the total organism to act objectively without words or symbols. The intellect will achieve such objectivity only after connection with the limbic and ultimately the stem centres.

Apollo it's great to hear from you again but you're still trying to fit Primal into a Gothic Mediaeval view of the brainstem. Like those paintings of St George and the Dragon where the maiden to be rescued is actually in control of the dragon symbolised by the dog's lead around his fiery neck held at leash in her hand.

It is a Medieval view that the brainstem is the cause of problems; that the 'lizard' in us is not to be trusted, to be 'dungeoned up' and ultimately slaughtered in the interests of 'rational thinking'.

This is the Cognitive Behavioural Philosophy of the mediaeval Christian / Catholic Church.

Paul G.

Arthur JanovDecember 10, 2012 9:36 AM

Paul: You are so right and brilliant. #2 The intellect can only postulate....that is why we get all those intellectual theories such as cognitive/behavioral. They are intellectual constructions unrelated to deep feelings. art

Again, I submitted this below Dec. 10, 2012, for being posted. Whether it gets up or not remains to be seen.

apollo    I blew the 1st post, mixed with other text. this is  how it should have been. You can cancel the other.
Poor Mr. Perfect is going to suffer a little pain, maybe. I hope not.

Paul:       It's not the 1st line that prevents access to Primal but repression (and beliefs) that prevent access to the 1st line.

ME:    Correction, Mr. Perfect. It certainly is the 1st line that does so. Is a primal not an involuntary reaction? It is the 1st line that can turn gates on or shut them off. It can blind us, if it likes. Hypnosis gives us some fascinating insights into that deep silent observer who seems to keep watch when the intellect 3rd level is out of the way. Repression and beliefs are motivated by the 1st line, not the 3rd. the 3rd just takes orders. This is where Art and I have substantial disagreements, for sometimes he likes to blame the intellect as well, as if it had a separate will of its own, in complete defiance of the 1st line. The 1st line in ultimately in control at all times as part of our instinct and controller of autonomic functions. You, Sir, have been served.

2.       Paul:       The intellect alone cannot discern reality, it can only calculate and postulate. Without connection therefore, the intellect is not to be trusted to produce an objective view.

ME:    Whether the intellect can be trusted or not, depends on whether the 1st line wants to cut it lose with instructions to get the answers, whatever they may be. If we want truth, we can find it. But if we want to run and hide, we will find nothing.

Secret master hypnotists can literally command the brain to see hallucinations while wide awake, and imagine nearly anything as being real. The mind is capable of any and all self-deceptions. But it is that deep inner core, the 1st level, that seems to control all that.

You’re wrong on 3, and in 4, you turn around and agree that the 1st line is in control.

5. The 1st line is never it's own enemy

You really are the silly one, Paul. Your error is quite self-evident, here.

6. The 1st line cannot 'learn' anything

Again, pathetically wrong and needs no explanation to a capable mind.

Number 7 is still up for debate, which is why I am still here.

I recommend you read more on the autonomic nervous system which runs all body systems that we are not always aware of. But Malevolent hypnotists can actually change any of those autonomic functions, by command, and produce astounding results, quite contrary to the external senses. Me thinks that perhaps you have just not read enough or thought enough about it all. That is also why I am here to lend a hand, whether accepted or not.

>>Art did not post this one from me above.
As you can see, both Art and Paul, in my opinion, look for ways to blame the intellect and make it the scape goat, since the mind is where they see the greatest threats to what they want to believe or justify. But in doing so, they are ignoring important fact revealed by MKUltra mind control victims and well known published research on how the brain regulates and controls itself. this is what makes Arthur's work a little bit disturbing. I think he has a real grudge with intellectual things. He also seems to ignore much of his own research, which puts the 1st line in control, except when he wants it not to be in control and wants to blame the intellect, as if it had a mind of its own.

So we can clearly see by now why PT fans have such a low opinion of the intellect and sound thinking and reasoning. They all imitate Art, the "grand lodge leader" of Primal Therapy and Theory, and one and all fearing the same horrible, terrifying conclusion that Art runs from; that there might be a God and a plan of God, and purpose, and destiny. Oh, God, the horrors, huh? So they all symbolically give themselves a lobotomy of the entire cerebral cortex and retreat to the lizard brain of the 1st level. Oh the humanity, the humanity! ;-) 

I attempted another reply to Paul below, but it did not get posted either:<<

Hi Paul, I was addressing Richard first and using MS Word and got part of yours mixed up on the tail end of his. I reposted, but I do not know if Art is going to put it up or not.

How the Brain stem is its own enemy:

The stem fears the pain, right? Perhaps it perceives the world as hostile and dangerous, right? It takes the ways out that are not productive and are even counter-productive. It is not ever good at giving in to the intellect or allowing the intellect to seek out things without dubious motives and controls of the stem. the stem sabotages its own long term interests.

But pain rising as a primal, is a function of the autonomic system, residing in the  . . . . .stem! It is involuntary, much like breathing, heart beat, blood pressure, going to the bathroom, digesting, even puking, which has much in common with a primal, actually. The stem does control these functions, in the cerebellum, I believe it is.

In fact, through hypnotism, all those things I mention, and far more, can be changed. It is a way of directly meddling with the stem, that does maintain contact with the conscious world of the senses and can interpret words coming in. Our minds can create what seem to be real realities, though in truth, they are hallucinations. The mind is most powerful in its ability to self-deceive without limit of any sort. This is all gathered up in the stem. It reigns supreme, regardless of what the supreme commander of PT says.

It can shut the cortex down, turns its gates on and off and raise living hell with the intellectual process, causing it to seek out whatever the stem would like. Art does not wish you to understand this, or at least this is my impression. You can follow him blindly, or you can seek out the details in what I say and see if I am not right. There are those out there who know perfectly well, I am dead on right! And they fear me, though they have the power to kill me.

Its your move, now, Paul. I say, check, old friend. Can you block the move or move your king?

Psychotherapy a Cult?
Back to Top

Monday, December 31, 2012    Psychotherapy as a Cult

>> I will quote the most relevant part from this, to comment on. Arthur is writing: <<

Maybe you think this is just a ploy to get your attention, or an exaggeration to ridiculous lengths but let us examine what a cult is and see if psychotherapy fits.  (Some of these ideas were inspired by a new book by Kramer and Alstad: The Guru Papers, and from my own forthcoming book: Beyond Belief).

So what are the markings of a cult and a guru who runs it?  Absolute authority and someone without faults.   The leader is a know it all,  who runs your life and tells  you how to live.  Who demands obedience.  Someone who does not trust you thinking for yourself.  Someone who knows what is in your unconscious and interprets it for you; this teaches you to mistrust yourself and doubt your previous thoughts;  submission to the leader’s thoughts.  Never to question him or his beliefs even though it can lead to your deterioration…. A military mindset.   Accepting a new moral orientation.  An absolute belief in the leader’s theory. Believing he has a special wisdom and knows the secrets of the universe.   Best if you know nothing of the leader’s life so that he remains a mystery (nearly always a “he”).  Even if the theory makes no sense (as in Freudian theory) there is a need to believe and submit.

>> Arthur is right to criticize psychotherapy as he does. They are often phonies, as I see it. They are all knowing and you should not question them and yet they offer little to nothing as far as scientific evidence to support them. They are more of what I would call programmers or bosses. You should recognize their authority and obey, no questions asked.

But that bold faced line I highlighted, it holds the claimed power of cult leaders. Only they could possibly figure everything out. You and I are too ordinary. They often have "communication" with God so as to be flawless, of course. But many professors and academics also claim that only they, with their great instruction, are qualified to know or judge. This is not only an authoritarian stance, but a religious one and a cult one, too. And it just happens to be Arthur's as well. This point he left out. But of course!

Only Art can perform the extremely difficult primal therapy and navigate the waters of the human mind. He insists that no other group or center can do this, only he can. This claim by him is an undisputable and well known fact! So whether he wants to admit to it or not, he is the promoter of a cult, where only he can "save." Adn if you question him, he will surely censor you and make accusations about why you think and reason as  you do. But he will not address your reasons and evidence. Why? Because he can not refute them, or he would not hesitate to refute. So he suggests your malfunctioning in the brain due to primal pain.<<

  Does this sound familiar?  Yes there are the cults and then there are therapies that fulfill nearly all of the requirements of  a cult. No matter what therapeutic approach it is nearly always the same.. A knowing doctor who knows what is best for you and will either tell you how to live, to find “wholesome thoughts”, or will do something to you to change your life. And what they do is based on a theory with little science behind it but lots of  free-form speculation masquerading as theory.  By and large, as with cults, we are renting a daddy or mommy who will tell us how to live because we feel so lost. They will protect and guide us, love us, be concerned about us and our future, and all they require is obedience; never said as such but implied.

>> To the good doctor's (Janov) credit, his practice is based primarily on science and he can change your life, if you are willing, of course. He can not do it without your participating as is the case with all therapies. But he does deny that anyone else, by any other method, can help you, which is an absurdity if ever there was one. Many have been obviously helped by therapy at one time or another. But Art defines or redefines "help" so that only Primal Therapy can qualify. Well, that is cheating, my friends. He has no right to qualify or restrict what help is or is not.  But he does, anyway. And this is typical of cultists. They play tricks with words, redefine, and practice deceit with their "doublespeak." Now more from the article. <<

We have had the experience of patients telling their doctor about Primal Therapy only to be pooh-poohed as a cult and worthless.   This often happens when the doctor knows nothing of what we do.

>> Many do criticize Arthur's practice without knowing it. But on the other hand, many who criticize know perfectly well what they are saying. Any REAL and honest science or therapy should be able to be taught to and practiced by anyone. But not according to Arthur. So the accusation is somewhat justified, like it or not. <<

 And what we do is the opposite of a cult.  We teach the patient what we do and want him or her out of there as soon as possible.

>> As far as techniques, they are not a cult, really. But as for claims, they are a cult. They do want a speedy progress but PT can not be speedy due to its nature.  A lifetime of apin and abuse can not be quickly gotten rid of. Its just a fact! To pretend anything else is a lie. Very few make fast progress. <<

The only authority is the patient who knows best what is wrong and what is in their unconscious.

>> Actually, primal patients often have no idea what is wrong. They are a mess. It is their primitive autonomic system that holds the key. It controls the release of pain, says I. Art and company help to get the pain up and out, largely by helping the gating system to work effectively while pain is trying to come up. <<

There is no great leader who demands obedience and insists on not being questioned.  Too often in patients, there is this search for certainty and we want a therapist who looks like a doctor and who speaks with an air of authority.  We do not want a hesitant doctor.  We do not want a doctor who is not completely sure of himself.  We want the rock of Gibraltar.  Why?  So we can relax, submit, be guided and taken care of.  Lovely.  And when we get that daddy and mommy that should have been,  we stay in therapy.  It is then a permanent act-out on both their parts.  The doctor gets the glory and adulation, while  the patient gets a kind, concerned doctor/parent. It is addictive for both and that is why it lasts and lasts.  And never does the doctor call the patient on his act out; he encourages it; you must come three times a week instead of two, blah blah.   It encourages dependence, which is not what we want at all.

>> Did you see that bold type? Arthur says he does not demand on not being questioned? Oh really??? That is why I published this whole article here, to show you he does forbid being questioned and that not all he says is supported with science. So he stands refuted on that claim. But if he was smoking something before he wrote this, all I can say is that whatever it was, it must be damn good stuff. I doubt that oxycontin or anything else could beat it. But he probably said it without any idea of how contradictory it really was to his actions. Like so many of his neurotic patients, he has a blind spot and suffers a neurosis, something you can suffer from, even after all your primal pain is gone. Minds can go wrong, without any pain involved. It is a fact and you can see that right here.

He also correctly points out why most patients and their therapies fail. Because what they want is the mommy/daddy figure to guide and direct them. It is, of course, a serious responsibility to have someone like this come to you for help. But then if the patient also wants self-justification as part of their treatment, well, many therapists oblige. From the standpoint of men, who is to day if that is right or not. But from the standpoint of God (Jehovah/Yahuwah/Yahweh/Father), it is not OK. In this case, a therapist must distinguish false help from real help and only apply the real help, whether accepted or not, even as a prophet must do.

Next is my post to Arthur's article: <<

I’d make a few distinctions as regards cults. A full blown cult usually requires that members live with the leader, and have every aspect of their life controlled by the leader. But if members are simply under a belief system of the leader, and live on their own, most refer to that as “mind control” not to be confused with alleged “Mind Control” of secret government agencies.

Further, as Paul noted, many aspects of society are arranged in cultic mind control, perhaps better described as thought or belief control. I would suggest our entire world is set up as one large mind control system, so as to be able to control nearly every mind on earth and make life very difficult for those who do not go along with that.

I liked Andrew’s thought, too: “It makes you wonder if we should really be living in a democracy, if we all have to go down with these voting hero-worshipers.”

Yes, democracy is not really democracy, if people’s minds are not thinking for themselves and easily influence to vote as the media direct subtly.

But I do note that censorship without explanation is a typical trait of a cult leader. It is the desire to control all information and propaganda, with results always favorable to the leader, of course. I am both glad and sad that most of you out there have not had the experience of Jehovah’s so called Witnesses. Their practice of subtle thought control is a marvel to behold. Few religions are as effective as this group is. But eventually, a good number of them end up leaving, either due to giving up on God, morality, or seeing thru the JWs.

But since time began, the goal of leadership has always been to control the minds of families, extended families, tribes, communities, states, nations, and the world. That the game, always! Most are completely unaware of that game.

>> I submitted the following for posting, 1:10 PM EST, Dec 3 2013: <<

I note that many here see families as a cult situation, which indeed, a family naturally is. A cult can, in theory, be good, at least in the family situation, but is almost always bad in any other circumstance. When I child is grown up, they no longer need the control of the family to guide them. They become more independent as time goes on.

But I want to emphasize, that many cult situations are not readily recognized, even though they are substantial. The military, for one, is a certified cult. They control your whole life and you have no real constitutional right or bill of rights when serving. They have total power over you and use it extensively and intrusively.

But far more subtle, yet, is the use of media, TV programming and Movies to “influence’ you and guide your thinking and tell you what is going on. They can ignore anything they want, and you will never know you have been denied knowledge. Schools and Higher Education serve this purpose as well.

Academic colleagues reinforce the “party line” and censor any fellow academic who dares go beyond the borders of what is allowed. Our employers have a huge amount of control over our lives and how we perform at work. If we protest our treatment, we are laid off or fired.

If we have a social network like a church group or those we work with, they too, can heavily influence us and we do not want to alienate them, do we? Then we will be all alone. So we go alone with party and our comrades and try not to rock the boat and accept what we are told and who to vote for, etc.

All through our lives, we are surround by pressure to conform and obey. That is the cult way. Interestingly, without detail, I promise a major cult personality will present himself and those in power will back him, and they will attempt an overt complete takeover of the world. That is what has been progressing now for some time. Don’t believe me. Just sit back and watch. But do carve these words in stone and throw them in my face if they are not here in less than 10 years.

To go against the grain takes a special sort of man or woman. Few have that grain. We like to be told what to do.


Hi, Afterthought,

I have realised that in the absence of connected feelings (ie: where there is repression) then beliefs are required to 'fill in the gaps'.

Beliefs are a fixation. . . Beliefs can be about anything. I can even 'believe' I'm worthless or some one else is. . . Beliefs do not necessarily come from an all controlling force outside of oneself. . . Although of course some tyrannical people insist that others must believe the same things they do. . . or else!

Beliefs are part of our defence system, but that I'm beginning to feel is a 'construct', we put up a wall of beliefs in the absence of real feelings. De-constructing beliefs is inevitably a pre-cursor to discovering your essence because the beliefs, like 'blocks in the wall' can stand in the way of recovering true feelings.

A myth of mock therapy is that you can carry your beliefs intact into true feelings. A warning about real therapy therefore is that you may need (at some point) to dismantle your belief systems. . . Either that or they will crumble in the face of recovered feelings. Or both.

Paul G.

Submitted 2013, Jan 11    2:52 PM EST by me, Truth1, as apollo    (It did get posted finally)
Well Paul,

As I see it, one does not need to do anything with beliefs, if one is going into primal therapy. You will not know what beliefs have to come or go until you start feeling. Some may remain, quite valid. Somme other may crumble. It is rather pre-mature to assume you can figure it out for yourself or anyone else until you have done it to the point of fully reliving birth.

That is why arm-chair or keyboard-monitor treatment of others is so laughable. One can not always be sure of what is behind someone's defenses or beliefs or whatever. After the feelings are out, then you can be sure.

Or, you can claim the therapy went wrong when some beliefs remain, and blame in on the intellect, I suppose. and it may well have went wrong but whether the intellect is to blame or not, I have my doubts. Usually fear is at the heart of most running and delusions. Fear comes from the 2dn and 1st lines, not the 3rd. But what do I know, right?  


Anonymous  "Psychotherapy as a Cult":    Jan 22, 2013

Paul - like your input
A J - I grew up in a cult, and this is where what you published elsewhere about meditation/transcendental meditation makes sense.
'Meditation' is absolutely central and vital to the cult operation; -disconnecting your cortex from your limbic system and then later reconnecting it to the leader's cortex, or 'having an empty mind with no pre-conceived ideas'/ 'you cannot fill a vessel that is already full'/ etc, as they like to say.
Thus the brain of the cult leader also becomes the parent of his follower's children.

>> This was a fantastic comment and Art approved of it, too, which is odd, considering that the cortex/intellect is the star and means of prevention of cults and cult leaders. As best as I know, meditation as practiced by New Age and similar, is emptying your mind of anything and everything.  Not such a good idea. I prefer something like biofeedback and learning to control your emotions and states of mind. AS well, chants are big with religion and cults since they dismantle the intellect and make you more susceptible to hypnotism and other influences. Chants are often used in MK mind control. Anonymous does not realize he is favoring my theory over Art's. Damn, I love being right ;-) <<

The Most Important Aspect
Back to Top

Taken from the link/article below:

What is New About the Imprint?         From:   Janov's reflections on the Human Condition
Posted: 21 Jun 2013 09:20 AM PDT

 It seems that new research is confirming much of the Primal position. This is especially true of the work of Michael Meaney and Moshe Szyf (McGill University,Canada). (see for example or or,68,1181 ) They are critical work on epigenetics, and how imprints through methylation can be passed down from one generation to another.

The researchers above use different term but describe the same thing.

“They don’t call it an imprint but that is what it is……a key repressed memory that endures and persists throughout our lives; it drives behavior and symptoms. It turns out that imprints can be passed down from parents to baby and from grandparents to baby. Methylation depends on the work of the chemical methyl group which is recruited when there is a traumatic event, and helps embed that memory. . It seems that when there is a surge of methylation part of it attaches to one element of the gene known as cytosine. It is now part of the DNA and turns on or off certain hormones and other neuro-chemical processes.. Once that happens methyl is recruited and the genetic unfolding is thereafter altered.

Let me rephrase the above, or elaborate on it. Hurtful injuries such as neglect, abuse, betrayal, and the like, cause physical changes in the epigenetics, after which, those changes are no different in effect, from DNA genetics. Behavior modifies genetics just as nutrients and toxins can.

Put in other words, our psychological state of mind will be reflected in our epigenetics and be passed on, if we breed. This is an amazing discovering that Janov has had a long time part in, usually without peer or competition. Cutting edge stuff on his part.

A study at Duke University showed that when female mice were fed a diet rich in methyl it completed altered the fur pigment of the offspring. In other words, it acted like a genetic inheritance when it was not. It was the result of experience and that is the linchpin of our theory… epigenetics.

“Think of that: traumatic events in very early childhood leave a mark or tag on a gene that affects us just about forever. They found that even grandparents affected the imprints of the grandchildren, which we will get to in a moment. But suffice to say that the experiences of our forbearers can endure and be passed down the genetic chain, the inheritance of acquired characteristics. This is something science thought impossible decades ago.

So pain and trauma are inherited and passed along. So we as a species, do accumulate pain and distorted epigenetics, indistinguishable, really, from regular genetics. Arthur can not appreciate the implications of his own discoveries.

“What the scientists found is that the right amount of licking and grooming early on left offspring with less chronic stress hormone output as adults. It is what we all know; that early love makes us stronger and less anxious. But it turns out that if the mothers were licked and groomed early on in their lives, that experience could be passed on. The genes could be modified by the methyl group (and also other chemicals) in a beneficent way. Good history in the mother, good childhood for the children. And more loving by the mother the less methylation in the child . And with less chronic stress hormone production there is far less chance of serious diseases later on such as Alzheimer’s.

“To make sure that these changes in the rat pups resulted from experience and not hereditary, they let normally stable rat pups be raised by neurotic negligent mothers. And the result was still the same,; unstressed babies. These babies had mothers who had normal amounts of methyl in their systems. Thus rats raised by loving mothers could pass it onto offspring even when the adopted mother was not loving. The genes for stress hormone output had minimal methylation. In other words love was passed down the genetic chain. So normal babies raised by negligent and inattentive mothers still had low methyl levels in their hippocampus. The babies started life one leg up, a good start in life despite a bad childhood. I believe that changes in the genes, methylation and acetylation, must occur very early as the whole neuronal system is evolving. So before we can state what causes depression or anxiety, we need to observe the early epigenetics at work. Again, pups born to unloving mothers were handed over to loving mothers, and those born to bad mothers reared by loving mothers still seemed to be normal and relatively un-methylated.

But good traits can also be passed on and bad traits reversed by later contributions of good traits. But how often to good traits reverse bad ones? Very seldom, says I. But regardless, what is becoming quite clear here is that the decisions we make and actions we take can affect future potential offspring. So Art says that making better decisions and formulating better strategies is not important or beyond our ability, without Primal Therapy getting out birth traumas. I don’t buy it.

“Here is one more reason this research is important: they found that unloving mothers of rodents causes methylation of the estrogen receptors in female offspring. Then when they had offspring of their own the offspring were deficient in estrogen which made them less attentive and loving to their own babies.  We as yet do not know how many key chemical processes can be affected by lack of early love. And more, we have no idea how many hormones are changed in neurotic mothers (heavily methylated) and how that affects myriad adult behaviors.”

Is depression inherited? There may be precursors for it which is never manifested if there were plenty of love later in childhood.

Is some of the tendency to methylation inherited or epigenetically passed on? And does that form the basis for depression? It seems from the research just cited that that neurotic mothers (methylated), are ineluctably forced to be unloving, thus laying the groundwork for depression in the offspring later on.

And what other hormones are depleted by this scenario? Are we born with a tendency to anxiety? Possibly but then the imprint is not methyl so much as acetyl., in this case.

“With acetylation there are more faults in the repressive system and “holes” in the gating system. Acetylation (recruiting acetyl) pretty much produces the opposite of methylation, a tendency to open rather than close.

As Arthur noted, it is hard to quantify how much of an impact epigenetics plays in later generations. It is likely considerable. But remember that it can be undone, too. But can it also be undone, with inherited damage? Bear with me.

“Early trauma produced heavy methylation in those children who grew up in orphanages. And that process then affected much more in terms of brain and neuronal development. So when we find a mother who is not loving we need to know that she may be driven by her epigenes; she is a victim of those changes. Her cortisol/stress hormone level militates against maternal instincts.

>>Above, we have a mother who Art calls a victim. Indeed, she is the recipient of harm. My question is, despite the disadvantage of an imprint of lack of love and resulting inherited depression, in theory, can she still gather enough control of her faculties to give enough love to insure that her babies are not unduly harmed by the same repeating cycle that she was?

Art seems to suggest in his theories that only experiencing those hidden primal pains can free us to behave better than before. I suggest that though it is rare, that some do rise to the occasion and gather enough strength to give their kids a batter break than the mother might have gotten from her parents. How would Art go about proving, one way or the other, that it was impossible, beyond any doubt.

I believe there are many experiences related by adults who became parent and were determined not to make the same mistakes with their kids that their parents did with them. Its easy to make excuses or find escape goats. It lets us off the hook and justifies, in our eyes, giving into selfish bad behavior rather than take the high road. It takes work and effort to care and do the right thing. When we are stretched to our limits, it is hard to find the will to expend the effort to not give in to weakness and the easy path of least resistance and effort.<<

Methylation shuts down a number of “natural” behaviors. In neurosis we cannot be natural and appreciate nature because we are disconnected and alienated from our own nature.  We cannot rely on our feelings to guide us because they have effectively been shut down; we are alienated from them. Literally, the feelings are aliens. We have found that patients on the verge of these feelings in sessions often run a fever. The body treats the feelings as a menace, a danger and something to be avoided; yet it is also what can liberate us.

>>Janov shows us just how big the obstacles are when we are shut down from pain endured. Our feelings are made more remote and inaccessible. No dispute there from me. What is in dispute is how much we can gather access to that hidden pain, if we want to. Many mind-control victims of secret government operations have discovered when they are dissociating (splitting, suppressing) and how to prevent it, after having had it done hundreds or even thousands of times. They had to struggle back to consciousness without help from anyone for many years.

Can we get in touch with feelings? Is it something we have some conscious control of? Art says, as best as I can tell, NO! but I believe it happened in my case and many others. We can shut down or we can open up and risk the pain, to get at those feelings. Building strong pain gates is the real goal. Making them and strengthening them is the key. Once in place and fairly strong, due to many attempts previous to put a conscious hold on feelings, we can go after them, and not let them freak us out or overpower us.

Our subconscious, for lack of a better word, can prevent us from full primals, unless it senses the safety and security it believes is necessary. When it is right, it will happen, and happen safely and correctly. In other words, maybe we need to strengthen certain areas or functions of our minds before primal therapy is practical.

What athlete would attempt to become, say, a world champion weight lifter without building the appropriate muscles? We can do whatever we want. The choice of what to do is ours alone to decide or pursue.<<

"Can we reverse or undo methylation?"

" The research informs us that with rats who had been damaged, and raised by unloving mothers, when they were infused with trichostatin did not show evident damage. As though the trauma never occurred. This drug removes methyl from the system. It did, in brief, undo history. This is what I think may be happening with our patients. In the reliving there must be a change in methylation so as to reverse history; this is what we shall study in our future research projects. It seems to me the natural way provides far less possibility for collateral damage to the system. Since we already have found that chronically high cortisol levels have been reversed in our therapy, it would perhaps follow that methylation could also be reversed. In a way, the levels of methylation can be a marker for having been loved early on or not having been loved. We could tell more than the statements by the person who claims he was loved in his childhood if he were indeed not loved. How much denial is there? "

I see many interesting things in the above. 1st, damage (methylation) could be undone with a drug. Absolutely amazing. Genetic repair on the fly! Now pain serves us as a recording of experience. That experience is important to learn from. So it can be saved and felt later, at a better optimal time, so that the experience and lesson can be learned. But if we have learned the lesson without the experience, then maybe the pain is not needed to re-experienced. Art feels this may not be so. Neither of us knows for sure.

Art also mentions the possibility of examining levels of methylation to know how much damage has been done or not. Indeed, this would be interesting to explore.

“Neurochemistry may be better relied on because it has no reason to lie and wouldn’t know how to do it even if possible. It can be a marker for post traumatic stress or how much repression exists in ADD. Or how much pain/repression is there in Alzheimer’s disease? We already have some information in this regard because autopsies on depressive/ suicides found them to have been heavily methylated in the hippocampal area. The more abuse as a child in these cases the more methylation produced. When we add this to our future research on telomeres and cortisol we will begin to have precise measures of the pain in us. And we will know when a drug is too dangerous for us, particularly the drugs like marijuana that tend to open us to ourselves; to our feelings and pain. Finally, we will have a marker for the efficacy of certain psychotherapies.  Does the therapy undo the past? Does it help relieve repression and therefore depression? Is there great first line pain in anxiety states? What seems to be the case is that love obviates methylation and produces normal souls.”

End of Article Quotes<<<

Arthur celebrates the possibilities of being able to measure “Harm” by measuring methylation. It would be wonderful. He wants to use it to measure, among other things I suspect, what he dubs “talk” therapy, which is not accurate. It is discerning productive choices and behaviors and employing more effective strategies for a more productive and less stressful life. Most talk therapies do not necessarily have this as their objective, but some, perhaps many, do.

Art then asks: “Does the therapy undo the past?”

Well, of course it does not! But does it enable a person to make better decisions and be more functional and effective? That, it might! Does it make the person feel more subjectively happy or relaxed? If it does, then it is advantageous and worthy of pursuit.

The Most Important Aspect

This article strongly suggests and rightly so, that pain and hurt can and do get passed on genetically, through epigenetic functions. We absorb and accumulate damage in our genes due to pain and psychological injury, as well as physical injury. This damage passes on to future offspring. It accumulates in the species. I say that pain increases far more than it reverses. That forbodes very bad things for the human race/species.

We become less and less functional with each generation of successive and accumulative psychological injuries and subsequent epigenetic damage, leaving each new generation starting off further behind the 8 ball and less functional from the start.

It reminds me of PTSD. The more trauma you experience, the less you can feel and function. You become almost paralyzed from the accumulation of injuries of the mind. I see young generations who almost seem paralyzed already, as if born with PTSD or just short of that breaking point.

What we are discussing is exactly the same as what the Bible suggests with its “Sin” doctrine. We sinned in the Garden of Eden. Our internal processes began to break down, until finally we die from accumulated degradation.

Sin is a misleading word for some as it has been misunderstood over the centuries. A better word or words for our purposes might be break-down, degradation, shortened-lifespan, and eventual death. But the harm we experience psychologically, damages us and kills us in time.

The Bible foretold a time when mankind would come to its end and were it not for God stepping in at that time, the species would die out totally. Accumulated Pain/Sin would destroy us.

Art does not acknowledge the cumulative effect of pain, leading not to better, but to worse and worse. The epigenetic degradation and downfall is obvious. As long as we make excuses for why we do not do better when rational thought gives us reason to do better, then we guarantee our deaths and the death of our species, God or not!

But we do see the very same mechanisms in both Primal Theory, with the new and growing epigenetic understanding that seems to be growing with it, and the idea of “sin” frustrating any attempt by humans to raise themselves up out of their own mess.

Can we wait and hope for science to solve this seemingly inevitable high-speed collision with a brick wall, or is the idea and concept of a God-Creator more reasonable than recognized. If both describe the same problem, which one holds the right solution?

Win or lose, I believe our intellects are our best chance of survival. Feelings have not done anything for us. God demands a proper use of our brains/intellect, which He gave to our species, to be able to comprehend God and follow Him, so as to deserve His help in getting us out of our own mess we started in our beginning as a species.

But Art’s emphasis on Primal Therapy as a solution, without admitting the inevitable collapse of our species, seems rather foolish. We can get healed (Art’s definition of that), only to die as society eats each other alive. What point is there to that?

To talk about ultimate solutions or primal therapy without addressing long term likely consequences, is insane. Really, I think people might be well off giving more thought to whether God really does exist or not.\

For if He does, then what is He up to and what is going on, and how do we fit in or do we fit in or do we want to fit in? Art will never address these but I do not think you, the reader, should be as afraid of this topic as Art is. I believe God is logical and reasonable. One has to dare to ponder. I ask, why the fear to do so? It is not rational !

You Think You Feel, But You Don't           Apr 1 014    >>I'm only found in red and brackets in this section<<

From Janov's Blog in the above title.    Posted: 30 Mar 2014 02:57 PM PDT

All the things you think are feelings are just that - thoughts. What you think are feelings: self-esteem, a sense of importance, feelings of confidence and strength. Are Nada.  Niente.

>>Art is gonna play some more words games with us. Don't go away. Its sure to be lots of fun. Now things such as confidence may spring from previous sources that Art will mention. But they are still feelings. Feelings push us and move us around. They are impulses as well. But because they are not primary emotions, Arthur has now declared they are not feelings. The "Pope" has spoken. Consecrated fans dare not disagree. And it gets better, too.<<

Now just think of what a feeling is.  You do not have to cogitate about it.  It just FEELS.   
>>Now can't the same be said about confidence and self-esteem? They just FEEL. No reason needed. We will get to the basis of these shortly. But Art
's definition of feeling would fit confidence and self-esteem. He trips himself up by playing with definitions and not testing them in reverse.<<

Importance, esteem are cerebral.  They have a different origin in the brain from real feelings which emanate from deeper down.   But when you think you feel it often feels like feeling, so the confusion is not surprising.  But we are discussing different brain regions with different functions; and the neo-cortex is in charge of self deception.  It is its ancient function—often, to keep from feeling the depth and horror of our pain.  One of its functions is as a structure of defense.

>>Arthur offers some interesting ideas and I can not safely refute or deny them. I would need to know more and explore more. But to suggest that importance and esteem come from other regions, needs more supporting evidence. It has possibilities. But Art may also be off here as well. I'll leave the jury out for now. Art suggests that these cerebral feelings do not come from far below, like strong primitive ones, I assume.

But the neo-cortex is NOT in charge. The hidden observer is in charge at all times. When barbiturates are used along with hypnosis, the upper regions like the intellect/neo-cortex are shut down. They are in control of absolutely nothing! Arthur has not done his homework very well. Shame on him! The hidden observer of Hilgard is the absolute key to total understanding of the human mind, But Janov dares not go there. A gutless intellectual wimp, says I, of my opinion only.

Art gets confused because the gates seem to be located in the neo-cortex or maybe at the entry to the neo-cortex. But those gates are turned on or off by the hidden observer, to protect, to deceived, to enlighten, or hide. What ever it is that the Hidden Observer desires or is commanded to do, will take place. Gates can be shut down or released. Arthur ignores a whole vast field of science in this fact. I could hardly call that honest, from my point of view. This is why Arthur can sometimes look and sound so silly. You can not ignore an entire field of science, MK ULTRA mind control and related, and not end up stepping in big piles of proverbial dog doo and end up looking like Bozo the Clown. Trust me, I have worn the orange hair a time or two myself. And we won't even talk about the funny blue suit.<<

Maybe I am putting all those booga booga centers out of business, although I don’t think for a moment that it is possible; they are businesses built  on deceptions by those who know better, and for those who are so blinded that they cannot know better.  One reason is that this nonsense is in the zeitgeist.

And secondly, it is much more comfortable to believe that we can feel importance or change our self-esteem with a few exhortations, or mumbo-jumbo; or that we can feel important when one’s entire early life was composed of those in charge of us, issuing orders and denigrating our every effort.

>>Here's that dishonesty again, I feel. I don't know anyone who suggests its as simple as Arthur says we say. I urge far more than a few exhortations. Further, it is the patient that must work hard and search deep to make gains or changes. Nor do I deny the role the early primal pain plays, to complicate our doing anything. But complicated or not, much can be overcome by analyzing what we do and why we seem to do it. That so few have ever done it does not mean it has never been done. But those who can do it do not need Arthur or Primal Therapy, so Art has never met such an individual. But he as seen many failures and does not discuss those.<<

And this nearly always occurred when the imprint was the most forceful and enduring. It stuck in our system and controlled our lives; it determined a feeling of unimportance. It was lodged in the limbic system and made us feel unimportant … for life.  No exercise later on will change that. People or therapists later on, assuring us we are wonderful and important, will change nothing.

>>I do not deny the power of the imprint. Never have! But its affects on us can be changed, even is few do. It only takes 1 to prove Arthur wrong. Here I am! The total brain is a marvel in that it can overcome tremendous adversity, even internal adversity of feeling, and find some value and importance in ourselves and ceasing to go along with others who might want to cut us down.

In fact, the mind has the power do ignore reality and go in the opposite way of reality. Or it can focus in on reality when the hidden observer has determined to pursue a complete disconnect with reality. There are literally wars that can go on in minds. Eventually one side or the other will win. Art denies such conflicts and resolutions. He says only Primal Therapy can make changes. True, PT makes easier changes, since you are no longer battling such powerful internal foes. But as the wolf well knew in the case of Red Riding Hood, there was more than one way to grandma's house. Has anyone ever seen Arthur in a Red Hood, by change?<<

Those early feelings live in every cell of our bodies; they are now systemic and organic.  Esteem is an IDEA, not a feeling, just like self-hate is an idea, not a feeling.

>>Did you see that? Esteem, the sense of well-being or confidence in our ability, can be conditioned and overcome previous conditioning to the contrary. It most certainly is a feeling, without any doubt in my mind. No one is selling me snake oil. And my mamma didn't raise no idjits, neether. Who does Arthur think he is kidding? Now esteem does derive often, from other deeper emotions. This I will admit and not deny. But it is a result of cascading emotions that lead to other sorts of feelings like confidence or esteem. An idea? Ideas can be easily changed! But emotions are harder than hell to dislodge. Conditioning is one way to change old patterns. Once changed, it will cause many other changes and a rearranging in the mind and behavior. Now primal symptoms will change as a result of road blocks in former courses. I serious doubt that Arthur is unfamiliar with this. So why is he saying the non-sense that he is? You tell me! I already know the answer.<<

Yet we can act like we hate ourselves but where does it come from?  All major ideas are cortical not limbic.  Our parents hated us and so we feel hated and not worthy of love.  That was an early experience. How do we raise that low self-esteem?  We feel how the parents treated us and make us feel like worms… worthless… not worthy of love. This is not a mystery.  Our feelings of low esteem, for example, derive from our environment even before we were born.

>>Pay very close attention here to Art's words, a means of trickery. He declares esteem, among other things, is an idea. Therefore, because it is an idea, it must reside in the cortex, not limbic system. So you see, When Arthur says that esteem is in the cortex, he is, in my opinion, absolutely and completely and utterly wrong, dead wrong. He has been sacked for a 20 yard loss and out at home plate. Strike Three! Now he accurately describes how low self-esteem can come about. But he has ruled out a way that it can be conditioned and moved out of the way, to allow some faith in ones self and his/her abilities.

To take conditioning to an extreme, to illustrate alternate ways, an individual can be hypnotized, drugged with barbiturate mixtures that can knock out the cortex and bring one down to a primitive level, with language ability retained for programming purposes, so that normal obstacles to changes are removed. In addition, or as an alternate treatment, we have torture to change and modify people. We have day to day conditioning in schools, the work place, the media, TV, movies. We are conditioned in churches and synagogues. All these can program and modify human behavior and influence it and control it even and I am supposed to believe that Arthur is unaware of any of this. Bullshit says I! I think Arthur is hiding something very big. but conditioning is very real and used throughout our world all the time. Unawareness of its use and effectiveness is inexcusable. The umpire has just ejected a player from the game! The more Janov tries, the more he fails, says I.<<

We were never treated as separate and cherished human beings; so we responded to our environment.

>>You mean the environment can influence our response. Hey, now he is sounding like me, but don't tell him that. It will be our little secret, OK?<<

And we feel unimportant.  Because it was our reality — we were unimportant.  A child completely loved never has any use for higher self esteem. Oops, those booga booga workshops are screaming their lungs out.   Do I mean that being loved as a child stops anyone from being transported to some unreal state?  Yes. Why would anyone loved and felt important to his family  search out a center to make her feel important?

>>No arguments with the above!<<

So clearly, it is for those who feel unimportant, and that comes from reality and is not neurotic.  It is a real reaction to real life events.   And once the imprint is locked in, there is only one way to change it; go back to the imprint. If you don’t, then you get such games as having people fall back into others’ arms to learn how to trust.

>>See the mistake? Only one way to change it? Had I the ability to hypnotize, and ability and authorization to use barbiturates, and torture, I assure you there is lots I could accomplish. It might not be so benevolent or good, depending on whose perspective it is, but I would guarantee big changes. In fact, I could turn a person into an obedient lap dog or whatever I wanted. Arthur knows virtually zero in my mind. Can somebody pat me on the back because I can't reach back there ;-) <<

How about feeling hopeless? Again it can set up during birth when every effort failed to give us hope of not dying.  The hopelessness was imprinted systemically.

So were do we get hope again?  From dialectics;  from feeling utter hopelessness when it was imprinted early on.  Does anyone think a therapist or guru can change that and make us feel hopeful again?  >>Yes! Me!<<  We can fall over backwards into some guide’s arms but will that change a deep hopeless feeling? Imprints are predominant; they do not accede to anything or anyone.  They have endured for our lifetime.

Remember that anything that emanates from "on top" is not a feeling.  "On top" can trigger feelings and if we are not neurotic they will be real feelings.  So here is Janov’s law: we can feel higher, better by feeling again those early negative inputs that made us feel bad, .  .  .   >>It is possible!<<

.  .  .  but we cannot feel better by aiming high, reaching for self-esteems.  >>Now I disagree!<<

The dialectic rules.  History made us feel a certain way, and returning to history is the only way to change our feelings.  Those feelings were imprinted during our vulnerable history and allow no escape.   >>Bullshit!

And the winner by a knockout, Truth 1 !<<

The Whole Truth and Nothing But
Back to Top

Janov’s Blog:     Janov’s Reflections on the Human Condition
Tuesday, April 8, 2014            
On Mental Resistance

A confession:  a year ago I was recommended to a naturopath for stem cells.  He was even near my house.  But I never went to him because “naturopath” didn’t sit right with me.  I was resistant; had mental reservations, and was prejudiced.  And then a few weeks ago my old MD called me and re-recommended anew this same stem cell group.  So I went just after going to Cancun for adipose tissue stem cells which did nothing and cost a fortune.  So now it is 2 months into the new stem cells and for the first time in 45 years I talk and am out of pain.  And this is a naturopath.  What does this tell me?  Stop with mental prejudices and resistance.  It kept me from getting well for over a year.

>> Take a look above! Art admits he was prejudice. He calls that stuff booga booga normally. But know he learns a lesson I learned by 8 or 9 years old. But better late than not at all. But that concept or prejudice cost him a lot of money and no improvement for a year. For some people, for many people, that trust in authority, that prejudice against mavericks and rebels, often costs them their lives. Our beliefs, though often just in our heads as head knowledge, can have a life and death result. Ideas make a difference, for either good or bad.

The irony of this is that there is often no emotion attached to these ideas, or at least not direct obvious ones. I learned thru my father’s experience not to trust authority in 1967-68. It was emotional, experiential, and resulted in ideas and concepts. Even if the emotions remain, ideas can still be changed, if a need to change is understood by reason.

Also worthy of noting here is that Arthur had prejudices, despite having emptied himself of primal feelings, so to speak. So prejudice and irrational thoughts do not leave people who have undergone a primal release of their birth traumas. They are not perfect, and still vulnerable to errors in thought. That is to say, Janov is not the Pope of PT, though he seems to think so. He is a flawed man, even as we all are. No disgrace in that, but it is wrong to suggest you are beyond error because Janovian doctrine dogmatically insists that primal pain makes our ideas go crazy. And therefore, absence of pain stops irrational thinking.

I, a self-proclaimed Pope, myself, boldly assert that irrational thinking is always possible, regardless of pain or its eradication after. As well, more emphatically if not outright hysterically, like a crazed evangelist, like a madman, I declare that sound rational thinking is possible, regardless of pain or no pain. The intellect does not have to be influenced by what is deep below inside us. The trick is to be willing to accept that we have faults that influence our decisions and ideas, beliefs, if you will.

We can then begin to 2nd guess what is down below, and confront our inner selves and demand the truth and even decide that our “inside” is lying, and we can judge by it’s (the hidden observer, to be specific) behavior, what might be behind its actions and beliefs.

In time, we coax the inner self into giving the intellect a chance to let it explore issues without hidden agendas and allow the truth to be explored objectively, without prejudice. After a while, the inner self begins to realize how important that objective intellectual analyzing can be to the inner self and the whole person’s benefit.

The time can and will come when the inner self becomes hooked on the benefits it is receiving from this objective searching and reasoning and when it reaches this point, it will rarely ever interfere again with the dispassionate objective work of the intellect. In fact, the hidden observer now uses all its powers to harness all aspects of the mind, and instinct to help the intellect achieve its shared goals with the inner hidden observer, who does sit in control of all aspects of the mind.

Now the two halves work together for the same cause and purpose. They are united rather than divided. United, there is nothing they can not accomplish together.<<

Janov now continues:

And they were recommended by a "proper" medical doctor.  The same is true of most medical doctors who cannot see and adopt the new.  This is especially true for shrinks, several hundred thousand of them in America.  After my 17 books, published in 26 countries, not one has come to us and wanted to know more about our work.  Thousands of scientists downloaded my scientific articles in the World Congress of Psychiatry (It is considered one of the most downloaded pieces in their history),  yet not one has contacted me.

I have found that most MDs stay in their groove and never seek out other alternatives.  And the question is, why?  One answer is, "I have the tools and will use it hither and yon, whenever I have a patient."  This is true in psychiatry where "I have the shock machine, the favorite pills, the rigid adherent to one single therapy often with no basis in deep science".  And what is wrong with that?  It is therapist oriented, not the patient.  It is he who has the power and the magical therapy; he is the holder of all the secrets.  And we the patients remain powerless.  Their "tool" is applied to all kinds of patients with no acknowledgement of individual differences.

So what is wrong?  Doctors are doctors, without a broad perspective.  They are rarely inclusive, mostly exclusive.  My prejudice came from the fact that when I grew up there was nothing else. Our MD was the be-all and end-all of status.  So therefore I began to suspect anyone who was not a "real" doctor.

>> Arthur recognizes that he was by default, programmed, by lack of alternatives. The doctor was an authority not to be questioned or disputed. But now he makes that same mistake, himself, as an authority.

As well, what Janov fails to do is recognize that both MD Doctors and Ph.D Psychs serve, not science, but political agendas that only serve politics and do not seek honest effective medical or psychiatric treatment and healing. Why? Maybe Arthur is scared of that conclusion. Maybe terrified out of his wits.

This is the real crux of real psychology, as I see it. Our hidden observers are very astute, perceptive, and know often before the intellect, where a certain path will lead. If the hidden observer has not developed much in the way of courage, he will sabotage any attempt that will lead to discovery of the terrifying truth.

Even though we might be all primalled out, so to speak, our inner self is still capable of ear and cowardice. But if it learns that any potential fear can be overcome with good sound logic and reason, then there is no truth too terrifying for it to bear or risk.

My own personal opinion is that Janov still has many fears and prejudices. He enjoys the benefits of his choices in having a nice income and lifestyle and would not want to lose those over truth. So he ignores the vast amount of info that is available on classified Mind-Control, which has the data that would reveal a far greater psychology than Janov has come to realize.

It may even be that Janov knows better about what I speak of but is not allowed to admit it or allow its publishing on his blog, for fear of losing what he has, otherwise. And he would lose everything. But if I were him, I would stop denying, and just fall silent. But when he asserts something stupid and contradictory to the truth, that is a bit much to swallow.<<

On the other hand, the "natural" healers I have known, whom I call booga booga merchants, were not high on science. They were more loosey-goosey.  Which is not a bad thing; they were open to everything; sometimes too open so that they lacked the discipline needed.  Their open-mind became a sieve.  And they used every vitamin in the book to treat patients.  They purveyed received wisdom.  And they too often say, that you have to believe to make it work; a bit of circular reasoning.  So if you are slightly skeptical it won’t work and they say, aha!, you see. So that field attracts believers and people who through wish fulfillment think they are doing great and say they feel wonderful.  Who can argue with that?  Nevertheless,  my current naturopath is curing me which 40 previous MD’s could not do over many decades.  They lacked the essential curiosity and willingness to look at all kinds of solutions, not just their bag of tricks.  So when I had surgery, and when it did not work the doctor washed his hands of my case.  He never explored about what others might do for me.  Why?  Because they do not know what others in the field do, and mostly, they are not interested.  This is what I call medical rigidity.

>> Take very careful note of the above bold text statement. A new experience changed Art’s beliefs. Oh, yes, it’s a fact! But it is also possible that a change in ideas or beliefs and the actions resulting from that, can and usually do, produce new and different results. It works both ways. Experiences change ideas; and ideas can change experiences. These are the things Janov typically denies anywhere else. But there you have it. Of course, I did not miss it!

But as well, what other doctors do not see the successful results of others is that they are told/controlled, not to take note of or pursue the direction of the successful (but probably unapproved) doctor. Good results are not what world powerful social engineers want. What they want is total control and prevent as much advancement of society at large as is possible, regardless if it is obvious what they are doing or not. Janov will not tell you this but I sure as hell will and always will. That’s my job as Truth1 !<<

So here is what happens:  as we mature the zeigeist and all its ideologies, perpetuated by the medical establishment spin a web of ideology inside us which then takes charge and directs our choices.  We are now driven by inner forces.  And I for one, avoided the one thing that could cure me.  How tragic.  What is even more tragic is that the Big Pharma and the health institutions prevent them from even using the term stem cells.

>> I split this paragraph up, with the rest to follow after I say some things. Note the bold underlined and the bold italic texts above. They are huge and momentous, even earth shattering. Art admits that Ideology takes charge and directs our choices. Powerful people have been supplying us our ideologies since time began. Having accepted those without question when we were young, we became programmed. We then became driven by inner forces, not even realizing consciously, that we had, in fact, been programmed and had our choices made for us but not by us.

Arthur has just admitted to the concept, perhaps without realizing it, that we can be programmed and controlled by propaganda, ideology, and conditioning. Once on realized that he is a robot or zombie, and that he can change the programming if he were to choose to do so, then he begins a new journey in life, whereby he can now question anything and everything if he likes, and determine for himself, what is in his best interests. He can now decide what is truth and what is not. But I doubt that Art would go this far. As I see it, his hidden observer will not let him go that far in that direction. The blinders will go up and remain on.

But what we have also witnessed here is that all those concepts and ideas can be changed, if only we choose to examine what we believe or think AND why we believe it. We have what we have simply because our parents and world around us, told us, it was as they said it was and we should just accept it, because parents know better and teachers know better and TV knows better. See?

Once we come to realize that they do not know better and may even be lying, then we have reason to begin taking inventory of everything in our minds and ideas. After that, the walls come tumbling down. We are born again, so to speak, reborn a 2nd time. Amazing, is it not? Ideas can change the world, and they can change people.

But I will admit to Janov, since he will bring it up, that ideas will not eradicate pain. They might relieve it, on a conscious level, (objective consciousness, not Art’s definition of consciousness) so that sound thinking can continue without distraction or corruption of thought. But the pain and its deadly effects will still be simmering below. That is a fact and PT can relieve/release that; but that will not fix many ideas. Art’s own prejudices and blind spots prove that. One needs to do a complete inventory to really fix beliefs and ideas, and it does not depend on PT or getting rid of pain.

But you must confront your inner demon, the hidden observer, and tell him you mean business. And you must begin your own personal inventory of all you believe and hold dear, and then seriously examine it in a critical light.<<

Janov again:

So what cures is banned. Not because it can help but because they flouted the regulations of “real” science:  double blind studies with plenty of subjects, and plenty of controls,  done at reputable science centers, blah blah.  The top guys don’t even want to look at the actual people who have been cured; they want statistics and proper procedures.

Following the rules is the summum bonum.

Why all this?    Because they can keep a monopoly on the whole business of science.  And extracted from their feelings, what they see and feel does not count.

In my field,  no one who has spent 10 years on his studies is going to say, Oh yes, I get it. I will start to learn something new all over again.  So it is not mental resistance so much as pocket resistance and energy resistance.

>>Actually, it is political pressure that keeps doctors and scientists from pursuing truth and better science and treatment. Arthur seems to have erected a wall in his mind that will not let him admit politics is at the core of this.<<

Let me diverge for a moment: today in science they reported that children who suffered emotional neglect were more likely to suffer stroke later in life.  Now if those researchers were to read a bit more they might stumble on my work and the notion of enduring imprints that lead to stroke. They lack curiosity. They remain in a medical cloister about what is out there; about what more there is to learn.  They lack a broad frame of reference, so what has been known for fifty years is ignored.

This is typical; everyday there is a new study stating the obvious. Researchers could not feel what was right because they lost touch with that baby inside of them.  They should guess that early neglect would lead to disaster, and they should say to themselves, “maybe I should follow up on that?”.  First, you need to feel what is right.  Living in your head for too long robs you of the innate sense; feeling.

Maybe it is not lack of curiosity? Maybe it is just indifference?  No matter, science and humanity will suffer from it.

>>Now its “doctor” Truth1’s turn. No, I’m not really a doctor, you know. A wise guy, maybe! Art points out that every day there are new studies supporting the existence of primal pain. Fact! I agree! It would be natural for them to follow up on this evidence. In fact, it would be very un-natural and totally illogical not to do so! Fact! Why do they resist. Because they hate the pain and punishment that would follow if they did pursue good leads in evidence. So they behave and do as they are told, or else!

But Art seeks to avoid this conclusion as well. But primal pain or its absence can no longer be blamed in Art’s case, since he is all primalled out and is the infallible Pope of PT. Lucky guy! But he will go on blaming the intellect, who is actually the real savior in each of us, if we would give “him” half a chance. But blaming thoughts and ideas is Art’s way, if I am right in my speculation, (since I am not a pope, I can only speculate), since certain ideas seem to really threaten and scare him. So why not vilify ideas and the intellect and make them the bad guys so Art can avoid confronting or admitting terrifying ideas.

That is what I believe, as irrational or not, as it may be. Don’t you run from ideas, too. If you can not refute an idea, maybe you should stop trying to refute an idea and maybe start thinking about accepting the idea as long as no antidote exists for it. Accept what can not be refuted and reject what can be legitimately refuted! Doesn’t that make sense

That has long been the process of the method of Western Thought, so we have been told. As Doyle’s Sherlock Holmes stated, “If one removes the impossible, whatever remains, however unlikely, is the truth.” Can you accept that? If not, you just failed true psychology, which is based on accepting reality and basing your life on that reality, rather than fantasy. Fantasy is the first step of many, toward psychosis, which is a very serious disorder of the mind. FACT!

So you see, Art’s so called “talk therapy” is or can be, far more than just talk. It is thinking, reasoning, analyzing, deducing, and concluding, based on facts and reality, not fantasies and lies. It all really boils down to truth versus lies. Bet on truth and you win. Accept the lies and you will lose. You only have 2 options ! Truth or Lies!<<

"More on Levels of Consciousness"
Back to Top

The following quotes to be addressed are from the article/link just below, From Dr. Janov:

More on the Levels of Consciousness         Posted: 10 Oct 2014 09:35 AM PDT

Years ago, when observing Primals, I noticed that there was, first of all, a resonance where one level triggered off similar feelings on lower levels.  This was not random; it was as if the system were reaching back in its memory bank to find help and/or a more efficient defense to combat current trauma. It was reaching into its memory to find the best solution. To combat and adapt.  It reaches to see what we did before when the going got tough.

>>Says I, its not looking for the best solution. Its looking for the automatic instinctive pre-programmed solution, until such time as the application of the intellect can find a better one to replace the instinctive one with. If there is never any better solution found, the pre-programmed one will always be the one resorted to. I let Art talk some more before on spring the trap.<<

Why is this so important?  New research that tells us that, (“Cancer evolved to protect us.”  Scientific American, Oct. 2, 2014. Z. Meraldi, see  What?  We get cancer as a means of protection and adaptation for survival?  It could be.

They want to go back to evolution to explain the appearance of cancer.  And guess what?  They recommend treatment with oxygen, inter alia.  They never said or knew that perhaps oxygen deprivation during gestation could be one cause of afflictions.  They simply tried to rethink cancer from the “bottom up.”  (Paul Davies, Arizona State, C. Lineweaver, National University of Canberra and Mark Vincent, London Health Sciences).

>>The cancer subject leads into Art's expounding on Consciousness.<<

"And we think first, from the bottom up and then the top down.  For example, we take a certain belief and trace it down through the patient’s feelings. We know how the feeling builds into belief systems later on and how to treat it, if it indeed needs treating.  Resonance works in both directions at all times.  Without this concept I don’t know how anyone could treat a patient."

>>The instinct, part of the Hidden Observer, is always in charge, ready to serve and protect the "conscious' self up front and in control . . . sort of. But the consciousness can also send messages down and make requests and demands. So yes, there are things that travel from the bottom up and top down. Communication flows both ways. But  .  .  . The hidden observer always stay on, even when we sleep and is always ever vigilant and ready to serve if we make a request or seek something. It can work on tasks and assigned subjects all in the background without our even being aware of it.

Art has never addressed this, but I suspect he knows it. He knows of Hilgard and Erickson so he must know of it. Art says that the intellect can warp the "reptilian brain" and overpower it and take over. Sheer nonsense! Indeed, the brain stem might appear to be subdued but this is not the case. It is more likely that the stem was actually the motivation to pursue or accept this idea, appearing to be the work of the intellect, apart from the stem, but in reality, the stem ordered the brain to come up with a rationale to justify what the stem, the hidden observer wanted and likely the mind/consciousness might have really wanted.

Many times the conscious wants to avoid certain things and be deceived and the hidden observer will be glad to comply, not even letting the consciousness know that the hidden observer is carrying it out. The hidden observer knows that the conscious mind does not want to know and would be in pain if it did know. So just as the subconscious hidden observer can help us learn and process things, it can deceive us if that is what we would really prefer.

The hidden observer is no fool and he always knows when we are lying or when we are telling the truth. The hidden observer can never be fooled, ever. He does all the fooling and relieves the consciousness of any awareness of guilt, shame, or self-deception. The hidden observer is always our co-conspirator in self-deception. He is there to please.

There are various levels or degrees of self-deception and unawareness. That is, such stuff that we do not want to be aware of and want to be blind to, can be mild and not far out of reach, or it can be buried so far and deep that we will never get down to the bottom of it or may only do so when we have a personal psychological crash, such as a drug addict or alcoholic might experience.

Art is always looking for an excuse to blame and condemn the intellect, but the truth is that the intellect, run by the conscious part, can say to the sub-conscious, "we want to get to the bottom of this puzzle and we do not care if it is scary or with threaten our previous knowledge." The "stem" will know whether we speak the truth and really want it or not. Being assured that no cost is too high to obtain the answer wanted, the hidden observer will then begin working in earnest on figuring out what the answer is, using its macro powers of mass-processing that the intellect does not have. We can know the truth if we want the truth. Art runs from this truth.

It may well also be that part of that desire to know may originate from the core-stem hidden observer. Part of our growth is the hidden observer gaining enough courage and overcoming its needs to dare to allow the intellect to pursue certain directions that could be scary or costly. It then directs the intellect and also begins helping the intellect find those answers with its super processing powers.

But whether the intellect/consciousness wonders and inquires or whether it is just the sub-conscious trying to recognize that its own base instincts are sometimes harmful to its best long term interests. Regardless, there is within us all, the ability to overcome instinct and replace its programming with better solutions obtained by observation and analysis of the intellect.

Janov does not believe any progress can be obtained except by a one-way process of primal therapy. But this is false. At least some can. But for those who are deeply removed from most important memories, Janov will likely be needed, but many still are not able to primal and progress  and are considered by Janov to be broken and unrepairable, but only after he has failed. He would be able to detect this up front or otherwise, blaming the victim, which may often be just, is still a cop out and many might just need a different approach, at least for a while, before the past can open up to primal therapy.

One thing you should all be aware of! Beware of anyone who says they got all the answers and solution with just one approach. There are many ways of getting some things done and what works for one person might not work for another. We are individuals and are complex. The problem as I see it is that promoting the truth of psychology would upset the Aristocracies and Oligarchies that rule the world. So Art avoids the whole truths and only gives us little pieces of it. That works for some but not for me.<<

The Meaning of Life?     According to Janov!
Back to Top

From Janov's blog:  Saturday, January 10, 2015
The meaning of life according to Janov.

So you are impressed by the good doctor, huh? You need to go to the link and read it all. I am just going to condense it considerably and sum it up.

"I have written before, there is no meaning to life, only to the meaning we give it; to experience."

I would have said, the only meaning to your life is the meaning you choose to give to it or not.

"We don’t have to ask what’s it all about; it’s about nothing." >No! I am not taking that out of context!

"That represents our feeling selves and down inside we react but don’t ask intellectual questions.  Down deep we are chimps."

In this case, Art is partly right. Many people are no better than chimps. Maybe even worse. But Art declares that our answers to the meaning of life are not intellectual, but that we respond/react deep down inside - the primitive reptilian brain, or 1st level as Art puts it. Art has in other places insisted the mind can only function to justify the impulses and instinct of the primitive brain, so called.

Art goes on to rant about gurus and addiction and that evolution is why we are here and only he fully understands evolutions' intentions, if any.

But now you'll have to put up with my rantings. Hey, it is my site, right?

What Janov misses, is that while we have intellects, most of us default to our base primitive brain. You might call it auto-pilot or instinct. God intended that the instinct only be in place in the early years until our parents help to guide us in using our analytical intellect to discern and distinguish right from wrong, beneficial from detrimental, etc. We so use our intellect to make technology, for one. So it does work. We have discerned the laws of physics, science, etc.

We have another potential ability. The ability to stop our reactions and emotions so we can pause to think about how we are reacting and whether there might be a better way or whether we should refrain from reacting as we are about to. We can put a damper on our impulses and desires. We can even suppress them for good or bad reasons. We can over time, develop self-control and strengthen our ability to restrain our emotions and impulses.

If we go on to develop our intellects, we can then analyze our automatic reactions and see if some of them might be better replaced with another response or pattern created by the intellect. There is a saying regarding a definition of insanity. Its defined as doing the same thing over and over again, hoping that someday you will get a different result.

The primitive brain is where obsessions and compulsions come from. Is that what you want ruling you? Getting rid of painful traumas would be nice but many do not seem to be able to do that, despite Art's treatment. Or it takes them 20 years or more. Is it a practical therapy that takes 20 years for results? I think not. But a good psychologist, and I admit there are few of those, can quickly get to the heart of matters and suggest breaking patterns and trying new things and developing new patterns of thinking and behaving.

It can produce very good results that allow the person to feel much better as testimony has often revealed and it does not take 20 years and many thousands of dollars. If one can start primaling fairly quickly, it would indeed, be a very good therapy since it releases the stored pain that disrupts our mind so much. But one can not know from the start whether they will catch right on or take years to get anything big out. So you could spend lots of money and end up with very little. This is the problem with this therapy.

But sadly, most people will never learn to use their intellects in any meaningful way. They will follow the script that mom and dad gave them, which is usually: "I have no reason for my command. Just do it because I said so!" An authoritarian programming response, totally empty of thought and reason. Governments love it, though! We humans hate taking a hard honest look at ourselves. We fear we might find much we do not like or approve of and we would not feel good about ourselves. So we either lie to ourselves or just totally ignore our deep  inner selves.

Helping a child to learn how to think and examine, and analyze, requires a lot of patience and instruction. Its not the easy way out but it gets far superior results. Our kids would be better, more likeable people with far greater intelligence and ability. The whole world would be far better off. Janov's way is very much appreciated by governments since it teaches one not to think.

What a contrast with the 1970s Janov. Optimistic, excited, not fearing or hating religion, focusing purely on the problems created by traumatic pain and how to get rid of them although he never suggested that often, this would not be possible for many. When it works, it works wonderfully. But when it fails, it fails spectacularly. Hit or miss is not a good solution. But a truly skilled therapist should see what can be done fairly quickly to get some new results or not. One can try Art's 3 weeks of primal therapy or maybe even 6 weeks. But if it does not start getting anywhere, then its time to try something else.

What Janov and primal therapy have revealed to me, is how much we are all hurt and damaged by everything in our world, from parents, peers, and the world. This was the concept of the Bible's doctrine of sin. We are born screwed up and damaged and can produce nothing good or even get out of our own way. Janov says he can fix it all but look at what a wreck his philosophy is.

"We are just chimps." "We should feel and not think." "Thinking is bad." "There is no meaning to life."

Wow! How deep and constructive is that? Little wonder he avoids any sort of conventional therapy since he would be a total failure at it. Now look at the following from this same blog.

"And then, alas, there is the third route; those who do not feel and never ask any questions of life.  These are the ones who exist but are not living, the problem of too many of us. Or whole culture militates against reflection.  “Get going.  Get it done.  Success is all,” etc."

Part of this is actually a brilliant statement. He mentions those who exist but are not living. He frowns upon no reflection as well. Wait! Reflection is thinking. You see, Art can not avoid contradicting himself many times a day. Because he does not think enough. Now think about this!

Janov from his blog:
"They do not wonder where their lives could be or what else they can do with it.  They are low in imagination and vision and do not seem to care; just as so many individuals in their seventies and eighties seem to give up on life and ascribe no further meaning to it.  They have lost their ambition, their drive, their desires and the notion of what could be—what could they do--with their lives.  They gave up on meaning because doing and thinking and feeling comprise the life of meaning.  Especially feeling; for that seems to be the essence.  I do not plan to join those who give up on life; my writing saves me and I hope, many others.  By the way,  I have a book, Beyond Belief, coming out at the end of the year, which discusses all this in detail."

I have seen this many times. Old people retire but have no reason for living at that point. They either go back to work or frequently die within weeks or months of retirement. If they linger, they just sit around looking blank and doing nothing except maybe watching mindless TV. Most people go thru their entire lives without any real meaning or purpose. My parents were both like that. One still is. Most old people are in this category, which is why they die so quickly.

What Art fails to admit, is that a life with meaning and purpose is essential for living and thriving. We die when we have no purpose or goals. Art does admit doing and thinking, but stresses mostly feeling. But purpose and ambition come from thinking and reflection. Art can not distinguish thinking from feeling. There is a high that can be obtained from setting goals and accomplishing them; and having purpose and seeing it be fulfilled. But this high comes not from visual or sensual stimulation as sex might provide. AND YET, I dare say, the high one gets from meaning and purpose and accomplishment in their lives touches off the very same highs as perhaps sex does, or cocaine might do very briefly.

The main difference is that the high is longer lasting with meaning and purpose. It has the ability to drive us and motivate us, and make us want to keep living and doing. Without it, we quickly start to die, almost as if we were starving ourselves in some psychological way.

Also consider this! Can you imagine not being curious about life and what is in it? Not wanting to be part of it and interact in it? Wanting to withdraw rather than interact? Indeed, a person with no curiosity or desire to participate in life is a dead person already, even though breathing.

Curiosity makes us want to learn, figure out, deduce, understand, and reapply that knowledge to life to influence it, make an impact, make life better and more worthwhile. It makes you want to get up early and keep going late.

Now Art admitted just above that he does not plan on joining those who have given up on life. He will continue to write and I feel the same exact way. I am excited by what I continually learn and feel it important to offer a people a chance to consider new things, whether they listen or not does not matter, as long as they had the chance.

Art again:
"And what does the depressive feel most of the time; “I have no meaning to my life.” And why?  Because he has no energy or “life force’ to get out of bed and produce a meaning to his life.  His repression has sucked the life out of him so he cannot feel any of the elements of meaning. His feelings seem to be buried deep down under the ceiling of repression.

What he is saying in my way of saying it, is that they are not getting high on life. They have lost curiosity, and desire to participate and accomplish. Yes, they have been very hurt or damaged. So when Art says you should feel and not think, and he does that often, Art is contradicting himself and at least 6000 years of human experience and philosophy as well as religion.

We need to be able to get high on life. How, you ask? By reflection and thinking as it has been done for at least 6000 years and counting, by thousands (if not millions) of philosophers, religious leaders, and even average ordinary people.

We can not get this high, which has long-term sustaining power to make us behave in our long term interests and benefits and keep us going, if we do not think and act in ways that aim for our long-term interests, goals, and benefits.

For example, if I were to pursue reckless bountiful sexual activity, I might get quite high a lot, but the obsessive-compulsive-addictive loop would kick in. I would get high, but then rather than wait for the desire to build properly, balancing it with other activities, soon I would be wanting the high again, much sooner than would be healthy and safe. But with the brain energy depleted for sex, the mind chooses to find an ever greater stimulation to get high. Maybe more partners more beautiful. Maybe more risky situations. More forceful situations. Younger partner situations. Maybe try some animals. Maybe group sex.

But with every new plateau reached and broken, it would be come ever more difficult to get high without a  substantial rest and withdrawal from sexual activity so that desire levels level off to a reasonable point again, where regular activity is balanced with other pursuits.

People who let themselves go out of control become wild and dangerous to themselves and to others. They are desperate and take very risky chances.  They are totally in the grips of the primitive brain where all that feeling that Art promotes, comes from. We do not want to make a habit of letting our primitive selves ever get in control. We want to put that monster ins his place as fast and early as possible and never let him lose uncontrolled.

We need to build the brain muscles so to speak, technically, the gates that control brain traffic going up. We need to try to become masters of our own destiny. It is not an easy or natural but one that is very essential if we are to realize any true potential in ourselves.

One of the paradoxes of this control is that the primitive brain is always in control for our own protection as it stands ready to protect us from immediate dangerous threats. Primal therapy should teach us this and certainly study of trauma based mind control shows us this as well.

The inner primitive brain can respond or relent to the intellect, if it perceives that the intellect is making a safe choice or a choice that will be beneficial, despite threats or possible dangers otherwise. One can not lie to the "reptile" in us. It knows when we are lying or not. If we say we want to know something, the Hidden Observer (HO) as Hilgard called it, knows if we really want it and how bad we want it. If it detects that we want it and want it bad, then the HO will relent and allow the intellect to proceed. As well, the HO ( some HOes are good, right?) can lend a big hand by putting our remarkable inner forces of deduction to work to help solve what we are trying to learn or understand.

But if the HO perceives we do not really want to know about something, it will "protect" us from what we do not want to know and keep us from having to consciously live with that fear or lying to ourselves. It keeps us blissfully unaware. Our HO can seem like a saboteur, but it is a protector gone out of control, partly because instinctive "thinking" which is feeling, a form of mind function, is a sort of thinking process, where reaction time is deemed the most important. But this is not a very bright or intelligent thinking. It is reactionary protective thinking. It is a built in list of priority reactions designed to protect us sufficiently while we are young so that we have time to develop the slower, but often more effective analytical tools to devise better reactions to more specific circumstances, rather than treat whole groups of circumstances the same way.

Because the HO is not too bright, it needs to learn to let the intellect do its thing, too, without hindrance from the HO. The HO will cooperate if the intellect, the consciousness, makes it very clear that it wants certain knowledge and is dead serious about it, regardless of risks or whatever. The HO will relent and even help. After the HO has seen good results and the conscious mind has been pleased and gotten high, the HO then gets high and this tendency between the two, to explore thru the intellect will become ever stronger and more dominant so that little will ever interfere again with a growing, prospering, bountiful intellect.

Now lets say a therapist of no particular therapy, was pursuing a new theory of psychology. And in the process, she found that some might get very unhappy and cause trouble for the practice, its direction and the income she is enjoying from the practice. Would this be enough to make her stop pursuing the dangerous, though correct direction her new therapy was going in? Not only might it do so, it likely would do so. Any profession that threatens power and the status quo will be forced to stand down or face persecution or even death, if need be.

So the HO can be a protector who commands the intellect to find a route of reasoning that will avoid making anyone unhappy and continue the profits coming in. This is the HO in protection mode, not discovery mode. We all face this demon in our lives.

But the theory of the HO is vital to truly understanding psychology in its total complete whole. That is why employed professionals can never advance any field they are in. It takes so called amateurs to do that. We might call them advocate researchers or lay researchers. Armchair researchers?

So while Art might discourage the intellect, I believe the intellect is our best shot at some peace and sanity. Let me illustrate.

Art is correct when he points out in his previous blogs and books that severely traumatized people die far younger than those far less traumatized. Sex abuse victims often die young. Torture victims, too! What goes on here?

The mind has this amazing ability to block out distractions and allow the intellect to continue without interference or distraction. This is vital to our short term survival, the most important one, really. If we die in the short term, its all over. But the paradox of this is that we avoid the short term, very premature death, but we make it more certain that our long term survival is cut short. Its seems unfair, I know. But consider God's view, which Art denies.

God want us to be able to learn as fast as possible and as much as possible. So He created a brain that could block out all hindrances and distractions, and most low grade dangers so that we could make quick sense of our world to ensure our coming to know and serve God and secure our change for coming back to life at the pre-appointed time to come.

In exchange, the long term life span is reduced because the mechanism that allows repression for the sake of learning and discerning, also causes the internal high voltage energy ( a metaphor), that is pain, reverberating in our brain stem and limbic system to cause massive friction and damage to the brain and body, too. The repressed pain generates huge amounts of energy that need released continually. If these are not released, then the body's mind and organs will suffer substantial damage in the long run.

My father was born mildly retarded. He has no pre-frontal cortex control over emotions or impulses. So he lets everything rip on whoever is close to him, particularly on family members. It feels good, like a release, getting something off your chest, at least for him. Relief almost like taking a dump on the toilet. We were his emotional toilet to shit in. But it is hell and damage to those who have to absorb his wrath and release of frustration. Despite his advanced age and poor health, his urine is often bright mild yellow, very clean and healthy. Mine? Often, dark yellow, orange, once in a while, nearly brown. It takes an awful lot to get it bright yellow and hard to obtain often.

I will have a shortened life span. My mother and brother are already dead. My father is in his mid 80s and may last till hell freezes over. I know my fate. I accept my fate. God will fix the balances of justice.

My point there is that if you can let off steam, you can live longer. It you have to keep it all bottled up, you will die far sooner. But you will have a chance to get your head straight in the meantime.

Art has failed to grasp this paradox. We need to be able to secure room and time for our intellect to do its thing. It is a matter of life and death. But in giving the brain more time, we are taking time from the body. Overall, its a good trade-off because God can bring life back to life if it dies. Art is quite sure that God is nonsense and delusion. Art is free to believe as he wants. It does not mean he is right or wrong. But I suspect Art has not given it much thought really because thought is a four letter word to him, as I see it.

So now I have put before you an extended theory of cumulative trauma, along with the function of the Hidden Observer and shown further contradictions in Art's assertions, as I see them.

I'll ask you this: Are you a chimp without brain, or a human with a brain/intellect? Do you have curiosity and excitement for life or have you already died, emotionally and intellectually? I say you need a purpose and reason for living. Yes, a meaning for life. It is an absolutely essential quality for continued existence. You can decide for yourself what that meaning is and stat living to fulfill it or you can lay down, give up and die. Its up to you.

But if you follow Art's seemingly (to me) void path of feel and not think, you will be headed for disaster. Art downs gurus but I see him as another one of those gurus he thinks do people harm and most of them do.

As well, I think that you ought to resolve what seems to me as the many contradictions in Art's philosophy presented as psychology. Primal pain is real and a real problem. But you want to be careful of philosophy presented as science or some other crap. Let the buyer beware.

The Meaning of Life Revised
Back to Top

So What is the Meaning of Life? (Revised)

Posted: 26 Feb 2015 02:26 PM PST

>>Just a few thoughts here to consider from Arthur's latest.<<

"So here we have a dilemma; those who fully feel are propelled to search for meaning;  and whose do not ask themselves about meaning,, and those who do not feel and also never ask them selves what is it all about; they feel something is missing but what?.   They just live and never reflect about their lives.  They find a groove and stay in it and never put their lives in question.   Is that good?  It seems good for them to live the unreflective and unexamined life.  They do not wonder where their lives could be or what else they can do with it.   They are low in imagination and vision and do not seem to care; just as so many individuals in their seventies and eighties seem to give up on life and ascribe  no further meaning to it.  They have lost their ambition, their drive, their desires and the notion of what could be—what could they do-- with their lives.  They gave up on meaning because doing and thinking and feeling comprise the life of meaning.  Especially feeling; for that seems to be the essence.   I do not plan to join those who give up on life; my writing saves me and I hope, many others.  By the way,  I have a book, Beyond Belief, coming out at the end of the year."

End of Article quote<<<

Truth1 >> He speaks of not reflecting as not good. An unexamined life is not good, even as Socrates suggested. What Arthur does not seem to grasp is that reflection and examination are activities exclusively of the cortex, the intellect's source. It is our ability to analyze that separates us from from the rest of the animals and in our limited way, reflecting the nature, the image, of God. To ponder the meaning of life mean to examine it and question it. It is an intellectual function, pure and simple. Art suggest earlier in this article and its previous version, that there is no meaning if we learn to feel. He seems to suggest that feeling eliminates the need to ponder or reflect. Isn't that what is basically said? I get the real strong impression that he is contradicting himself and does not even see it. I am perplexed.

Perhaps I can shed a light bit of light on what Art might be missing or misunderstanding. Feeling as he sees it, fills need, which silences us from asking questions about life. That is, we do not need to ponder or reflect if we have been connected to all our feelings. But I strongly disagree with this.

First, That we are here at all, surely would make any reasonable man or woman wonder, at the every least, if there even is a meaning to life. Part of why they wonder is that our intellectual abilities seem to suggest a possible meaning lurking somewhere just outside of discernment. How did this marvelous intellect come about? Why are we so different from the animals. Yes, I know that in some ways we are too much like animals. That is another story.

But one of the basic premises of many philosophies is that something can not come from nothing. A mind must have come from an even greater mind and architect/programmer. That is to say, a lesser mind likely came from a greater mind. Arthur is quite sure there is no creator of our minds, and that they evolved without input or engineering from anything. Like My self, many religious people are religious because they do not believe that something can come from nothing, all by itself without any help. It is a string of logic and it seems pretty convincing to me and many others. But anyone should feel free to disagree if they like. It does not affect me.

But I am going to offer another idea. The biggest problem I see in the world is that while we have these marvelous intellects in us, with vast potential, seldom do most choose to use this incredible resource and its great potential. Percentages? 1% might use it. Maybe only a tenth of 1%. A hundredth of 1%? Regardless of exactly how much, for sure, most never realize their greater potential. Why?

I was hoping you would ask. If we are diverted or distracted by unmet needs, then we tend to try to get those needs fulfilled, at nearly any cost and we neglect other interesting pursuits that involve an intellect. So does primal pain keep our intellects at bay. I would suggest it certainly does. But just because that is how it usually goes, at least 99.99% of the time, it does not mean that absolutely no one ever bothers with the intellect. We see many products of our intellect in the things we produce such as technology, or in the ideas and concepts we might formulate into philosophies.

Despite the primal pain we all accumulate, we still manage some intellectual accomplishments. Not enough, too much of the time, but some at the least.

So here is my theory, an intellectual product of my cortex mind. Whether God or Evolution, and I say God, the goal is to use our inborn instincts to guide us in our early years and keep us relatively safe. We bond to parents because we need and depend on them to survive. But as we grow and develop, the design and plan was to have out intellects develop so that we could begin to realize that those instincts do not serve us well after we get past the primitive childhood stage of our minds.

We find that many automatic reflexes are not versatile enough for the many varied circumstances we encounter in life. Thru Reflecting and analyzing, we can start to make custom reactions and game plans for particular circumstance that require a more sophisticated reaction than just fight or flight. And so over time, we create or could create a large number of individual rules, circumstances and situations that bypass the old outdated antiquated instinct and employ the new, more effective strategies for individual circumstances.

Our minds are capable of far more than we have ever asked of them. And we should ask more of our minds. Art does not seem to believe there is such potential because of how so few ever reach noticeable advances. He does not believe it is even possible. What is more, I think he is very afraid of the direction that goes in. He believed what he likes to believe. He imagines that he is free from pain and from errors in thought. He might be free from pain, although that is not my opinion, but he is not free from error of thought and no one is. That is why we need to continually ponder and reflect upon what we know and do.

In short, do not be afraid to ponder, wonder, imagine, reflect, examine, analyze, and even form judgments and conclusions, which you can always revise at any time if more info should come in to suggest a revision. Our brains are very flexible. Flex yours today.

Related Articles
Holistic Psychology
On Hypnosis
Janov Reconsidered
Janov in Action
Educate Your Children
Teaching and Learning
Motivation Speakers
The Psychology Factor
Christian Behavior & Practice
Christian Community
Sexuality Topics Page

Back to Home/Index       Truth 1 - The best site on the internet!

Back to Top