[...]her in some politico-philosophical debate, in which he talks with machine-gun rapidity expressing himself with a virile kind of forceful, businesslike vigour (while the other feels quite strongly urged to argue some of these points with him, though not being given a chance to say much), while he strolls about on his mobile phone and posing himself physically irrelevant to the other --> when in-fronted with Jassem or Sina, one feels strange (losing your mind, feeling like an insecure child *engaged in such a broadly divided interrelatedness with a parent*) while that feeling appears as simply a ‘crazy’ product of one's own imagination

(is non-verbal interaction always sexual?)

nonsequitur (a typical schizophrenic technique)

(to get free from) the delusion that you had had not one mother but many different ones

a continual unexpected switching from one conversational topic to another without any marked shift in feeling-content is in itself a mode of interpersonal participation which can have a significantly disintegrating effect upon the other person's psychological functioning --> a remark for me in my lecture-performances, i can't cause disintegration on other people's thinking for the sake of art --> *to undermine the other person's confidence in the reliability of their own emotional reactions and of their own perception of outer reality* ==> de-maintain grasp on reality <-- (often) artist's failure to develop **adequate reality testing**
-the artist is not allowed to make the audience crazy!!?? @Jassem, Dominguez's “mental cruelty”

techniques of undermining of ego-functioning (in the form of: deliberate experiments in the service of totalitarian political ideologies, cultural undercurrents in present-day democratic societies, and in the lives of the schizophrenic)

-what are the effects of your work on other's ability of participation in life?

Searles: effort to drive the other person crazy can be motivated predominantly by a desire to externalize the threatening craziness in oneself
(-artists do that?)

*introjected crazy parent* (==> predominance of the one's own irrational and cripplingly powerful superego)
(parents, crazy or not crazy, are always introjected[?])


love and solicitude (in mother-child relatedness) ==> impel the child to collaborate with mother in this pathological integration
-child loves her mother so deeply that he sacrifices his own developing individuality to the symbiosis necessary to her personality-functioning


Foad's psychology: bringing upon himself any catastrophe which is sensed as being inevitable, in his effort to diminish intolerable feelings of helplessness and suspense in the face of it


(parents who are not sufficiently openly psychotic ==> child secret knowledge of parent's craziness -->) child's transference phenomena --> always one or another of the parents was “a little crazy”
[+ not to mention that one strugghng against a developing psychosis will project his or her own threatening ‘craziness’ on to one or another parent]


desire to find a soul-mate to assuage unbearable loneliness <-- a parental motive reflected in child's fanatical loyalty to the parent
(the very lonely person who hungers for someone to share her or his private emotional experiences and distorted views of the world) --> “tried out” her paranoid ideas on him (!!**)
[==> chronic schizophrenia]

our immediately and vividly real parent-image ==> a libidinally cathected reality

(to get free from) our magically ‘close,’ magically ‘mutually understanding,’ two-against-the-world relatedness with the parent

infantile-omnipotent relatedness between:
•the ‘sickest’ least mature areas of the parent's personality
•the patient's personality
==Searles==> obstacle to the patient's becoming well

transference development: therapist inevitably becomes deeply immersed in the subjective experience of magical closeness and shared omnipotence with the patient

(offered to the patient in childhood by the parent:) the *lure* to share the delights of being ‘crazy’ along with the parent


or:
(?Jassem or Sina's motive and genuine effort of) making the other person crazy (~ to weaken their personal integration ~ to diminish the area of ego's competency) <~/?=> *making the other person present* (Martin Buber) --> fostering of the other person's intra-personal and interpersonal integration or self-realization, (an effort to) to help the other person [seen as a child to become mature?] toward better integration ~ love

[for Guattari, the problem is not to reach an integrated ego, but to constantly change the composition ==> to unblock the situation (reactive assemblages causing paranoia) ==> to be able to do something else ~=> to become someone else]
[how to learn your way out of philosophy as philosopher ~= *to apprehend what you know* in a creative way]

loving relatedness --> responding to the wholeness of the other person (relating to a small child or to a psychiatrically ill adult, and so on)

}--> (which is fundamentally) a parental disposition [and the offspring might represent a miscarriage of the parent's wish]
-the problem is that you cannot always know the precise ego-capacities of the other person
-your interventions could be ill-timed or ill-attuned ==> disintegrating effect


questions regarding the processes of feedbacking in apass: to help the other person (not to become aware of truth about themselves or their work, rather) to construct figures about themselves and their relationships with others, figures which could provide the basis for rapid ego-growth and personality-integration. but sometimes it is too fast, the ego regresses, and it becomes an experience of developing psychosis

pathological defense:
•delusions
•hallucinations
•depersonalization
•

skilfully dosed and skilfully timed increments in psychotherapeutic participation [such as premature interpretations demanded usually in feedback sessions] ==> opposite effects (rather than an integrating effect upon the artist researcher)


the schizophrenic patient's individuality resides partly in his symptoms
(Searles > Szalita-Pemow)


?gratifications in the ‘crazy’ symbiotic mode of relatedness (despite the anxiety- and frustration-engendering aspects that it offers)

earlier struggle between child and parent to drive each other crazy --> evolving transference of the patient-therapist relationship --> to crack each other


the economy *feelings of confusion and unreality* for iranians, in public political realm of state and individual symbiosis, as well as intersubjective early childhood and parent symbiosis --> the ways it enters cultural imaginary and artistic expressiveness --> *how and why iranian artists often try to make their audience crazy* [-and myself included, check Sina lecture's chaotic verbalizations of delusional materials --> jouissance of disorganization]
-(in my lectures) am i externalizing my psychosis? [~ romantic]

(mother repeatedly commanding the child ‘Now, think!’ [~ to perceive the secret] ==>) threatened, mistrustful, isolated self ==> finding hidden meanings + sarcastic response [~=> unnerving the other]

small children exposed to unfamiliar and complex situations ==> often experience of ‘you are crazy!’


modern culture of obsessive-compulsive character traits as orderliness, competitiveness, intellectualization ==> obsessive-compulsive type of basic personality structure (is made very common among artists, people who are busy one way or another with analysis and psyche of the other) ==> **reaction formation** (which is one of the major defense mechanisms of the obsessive-compulsive) ~= long-repressed desires **to dismember the personality-structure of other persons**
[obsessive-compulsive personality type is very common in expertise societies: tavahosh-e takhasos, clean (+ “contaminated” things), one is deeply immersed in research, mental control, not wasting time, adherence to routines/rituals, washers, checkers, impairment in formulating an organizational strategy, etc. ==> cognitive inhibition, or violent disinhibition]

wishes to foster personality-disintegration in other persons + genuine and powerful interests in helping them <-- how is this possible?!
-Searles suggests that the desires to drive the other person crazy are a part of (the limitlessly varied person[...]