Posts by Kyle Lee7

A psychotherapist shouldn't be sharing personal details with their clients—certainly nothing regarding their private life or their sexuality.
The whole point of therapy isn't about the therapist, so there's really no reason to talk about them. In fact, they aren't supposed to be handing out advice or pushing their own personal beliefs and values onto anyone.
At its core, psychotherapy isn't some form of counseling service, nor is it a religion.

Sandra Parker3 said:I’d bet this guy wasn't even thinking or acting out of malice by his own twisted standards; he was probably just lost in some blissful state of self-absorption,
which is really the only metric that matters, isn't it?

So how did it all go sideways for him, or what could have actually pulled him out of the gutter?
Whatever you think—whether it's his thoughts, his belief systems, or his level of consciousness—I'm curious to hear it.

The latter individual was essentially a sociopath or psychotic (a top-tier psychiatrist told The Morning that we're looking at narcissistic personality disorder here)... that's getting a bit too deep for my expertise, so I won't try to play doctor.

Regardless, anyone who is truly aligned with themselves and their inner Source simply wouldn't have the capacity to inflict harm on another person.

electrictiger70 said:I think we need to emphasize certain points here... it holds true that some of your thoughts or unconscious patterns might eventually lead to an energetic blockage or physical illness because the psyche and the body are not separate. However, saying that simply learning life is dangerous will cause you to contract a specific disease feels like a bit of an overreach to me. I understand your point, but I think you are exaggerating, primarily because the implications of your claim are extreme and parts of the logic don't quite hold up—this whole quantum physics angle isn't that simple. For instance, what about those people who do terrible things and think terrible things every day, yet nothing bad seems to happen to them? That’s where the error lies from the start: what we are discussing isn't just "thoughts," it is unconscious belief patterns. Saying thoughts shape the world is not the same as saying unconscious belief patterns shape the world.

People also resist this idea because it would imply they are responsible for the bad things in their lives, but that shouldn't be viewed that way. First off, they aren't "to blame" and they didn't desire for bad things to occur, but they were—unbeknownst to them—sending out signals that say: I am powerless, and the world is a terrifying and dangerous place.
But one day, when you realize how this works, you realize that from that moment on, you have freedom and choice.

Of course, as you noted, you can try to think positively at a hundred miles an hour, but if deep down you harbor unconscious emotions, beliefs, or childhood traumas, those conscious positive thoughts won't act like a magic wand. However, every single positive thought does bring a slight shift, which leads to new positive thoughts, which brings further shifts.
The real work is on oneself, and that is a lifelong endeavor.

I agree with your line of reasoning, but I would still choose to swap "positive thinking" for the underlying belief patterns behind those thoughts... And that is why this entire psychology of "positive thinking" doesn't work at all; you can hardly address unconscious patterns through conscious positive thinking. It's been tested, and it's ineffective.🤣, the best possible outcome when you find yourself in this position is simply negation.
If we are discussing the process of becoming aware of the underlying belief patterns that drive our thoughts, then we are dealing with an entirely different matter altogether 👍

- I didn't actually mention quantum physics anywhere
-unconscious belief patterns are incredibly powerful, though that doesn't mean conscious thought lacks influence—it’s really just a matter of which areas of your life have blocks and which don't. Where there's no resistance, you can easily "allow" things to happen
-it all comes down to flow versus resistance. There is a powerful life force at play, and then there is resistance (the more resistance you create, the more problems you attract—and that resistance comes from both conscious and unconscious beliefs or feelings, like thinking "nobody loves me," for instance)
-following that logic, any positive thought, feeling, or belief—whether conscious or subconscious—will always carry more weight than a negative one
-positive thinking works, provided you aren't fighting against it by doubting its very power (which creates resistance)
-trying to force positive thinking on someone when their "vibration" is miles away from that state is just unproductive. You're absolutely right there, but that's why you have to take it one step at a time, like climbing a ladder (for example, if you feel sad, the first move might be shifting toward anger, then to frustration, then maybe impatience, then toward a sense of positive expectation, then optimism, then excitement, and finally relaxation... you can't just skip ten steps from sadness straight to pure happiness)
-as for the people who constantly think and act poorly: just because you don't see immediate consequences doesn't mean they aren't happening. They might feel miserable internally, suffer from health issues, live in a constant state of rage, or eventually face justice, much like how Radovan Karr did

In my experience, I don't know a single person who constantly thinks and acts poorly while remaining genuinely happy. That alone is a massive contradiction!

placidranger said:Thoughts shape subjective reality—but they have zero impact on objective reality. There's still no proof that thought influences physical matter, despite countless attempts to prove otherwise. Just because religions claim something doesn't make it true.

The fact that your thoughts don't physically manifest right in front of your eyes the moment you think them—which is why you can't wrap your head around it—is a completely different issue altogether.
And just because modern science is struggling to explain these laws doesn't mean they don't exist.

A few centuries ago, people like you were arguing that the Country was a flat disc, simply because you thought we'd all fall off if it weren't.

Actually, it's the exact opposite—what you're describing is an ancient dogma, essentially the equivalent of believing the Earth is flat. Both are nothing more than unverified convictions.

You might be wrong, but hey, that's your right.😉

Most people carry around this messy mix of positive and negative beliefs, and their reality ends up being a direct reflection of that—it’s really just a blend of the good and the bad. For instance, I’ve always held the firm belief that my education and career path will go well, and as long as I maintain that high vibration, I find myself constantly moving upward. Of course, I occasionally get tripped up by sudden waves of doubt or fear, which causes things to slide downhill for a bit. However, because my baseline frequency for my professional life stays so positive, any falls are short and minor, while the progress remains steady. On the flip side, I struggle with some deep-seated negative beliefs regarding my personal life that stem from my early childhood. As long as I’m clinging to those old patterns and mindsets, I find myself stuck in the exact same cycles in my private life.

The boundary lies exactly here: one person can't just stop and declare they see white elephants, expecting them to manifest instantly right before their eyes.

But if you imagine that everything possesses its own unique energy—that thoughts have energy, feelings have energy, and matter itself has energy (or if it’s easier to call it vibration)—then, if you can accept that every vibration attracts another vibration on that same frequency... then you can realize that everything happening in your life is a perfect reflection of your vibrational output.

What happens to you, and what you actually create, is a vibrational match to the thoughts, beliefs, and emotions you are broadcasting (as you mentioned—whether consciously or unconsciously).

People will often argue, "But I developed this specific illness that I never even thought about, nor did I even know existed," or, "It's not like I WANTED this terrible thing to happen to me!"
And you're absolutely right; you might not have even heard of that illness. But on the other hand, if from early childhood you lived in an unstable environment and were raised to "learn" that life is dangerous, that you are susceptible to sickness, that people are out to get you, that there is no way to protect yourself, that you are constantly under attack, or that you're just unlucky... then the events in your life will reflect exactly that. That pattern eventually condenses into a vibrational output, which might manifest as a disease you never even knew was possible.

People also resist this idea because it implies they are responsible for the bad things in their lives, but you shouldn't look at it that way. First off, they aren't "to blame," and they certainly didn't want bad things to happen. However, without even realizing it, they were sending out signals that essentially said: "I am powerless, and the world is a terrifying, dangerous place."
But one day, once you understand how this mechanism works, you realize that from that very second onward, you have freedom and choice.

Of course, regarding what you said about trying to think positively at a hundred miles an hour: if you have deep-seated unconscious emotions, core beliefs, or childhood traumas buried inside, those conscious positive thoughts won't act like a magic wand. However, every single positive thought creates a small shift, which leads to new positive thoughts, which in turn brings further shifts.
The real work is inner work, and let's be honest, it's a lifelong journey.

placidranger said:

We’re talking about the subconscious—that non-conscious layer of our total awareness that is just as real as anything else. Every single thing we've ever encountered—every sound, every scent, every lived experience in this life (and maybe others)—is tucked away in there. It's essentially how we exist. It builds our daily reality through memory, logic, emotion, and those automatic reactions we can't seem to stop. Because of this subconscious programming and those deep-seated habits, we end up inviting suffering into our lives—those endless, unresolved cycles—and, frankly, we bear some responsibility for it.

Sure, you could interpret it that way, but no matter how you slice it—thoughts don't actually pull physical objects toward us (unless we're speaking metaphorically).

Actually, I’d argue thought is more powerful than matter itself. Thought creates matter. No matter how you look at it, thoughts are what draw things toward us—whether it's objects, other ideas, people, or relationships.
You can find this principle echoed in almost every major world religion, from the Bible to Eastern philosophies (it’s the classic "ask and it shall be given" sentiment).
And for instance, electrictiger70 provided a beautiful explanation of this from a psychological perspective.

Now, the fact that your thoughts don't instantly materialize right in front of your eyes the second you think them—which might be why it's hard to wrap your head around—is a completely different conversation.
Just because modern science is still playing catch-up when it comes to explaining these laws doesn't mean they aren't real. A few centuries ago, people would have argued the Earth was a flat disc because they thought they'd fall off the edge if it weren't!

fadedmason said:I dealt with a brutal case of the flu myself: I had a constant 104 fever for ten days straight, and once that broke, my throat started hurting and I think my lungs were affected too (it took another 21 days to recover). My primary care doctor actually just sent me home—she honestly thought I wasn't going to make it through...

So what kept you at home? Good grief, lady, you could have gone to the ER.

mistygull21 said:but her first test came back normal, while the second one (just a day later) didn't.

It’s possible she just got confused. Another possibility is that the results were misread. For instance, there was a major scandal over in the UK where they had issues because the tests were being interpreted by staff who weren't sufficiently qualified. This led to women receiving false negatives, which meant cancer went undetected until it was too late. They ended up having to audit thousands upon thousands of previous results, calling all those women back to tell them—no, you aren't actually fine.

A close friend of mine was put on a constant cycle of antibiotics for bladder infections for five straight years. Honestly, her brilliant primary care physician never once thought to refer her to a specialist during that entire half-decade. I’ve known her for about a year now, and when she first told me about her situation, I immediately told her she needed to demand a referral to a urologist. The outcome? After undergoing a cystoscopy, it turns out her bladder looks like it belongs to someone sixty years older; the inflammation is chronic and essentially incurable, and now she’s moving into testing for bladder cancer. To make matters worse, her urologist keeps keeping her on various antibiotics, cycling through everything from nothing to heavy-duty stuff like Ciprofloxacin.

Sandra Parker3 said:I’d say she’s an undeniable success, both ways.

The only real difference is whether you had it handed to you on a silver platter or if you actually had to bleed for it.

"Silver" is just being served; "bronze" is something you have to earn through pure grit.

🤷 ☕

But silver was already won. For it to be "served on a platter," as you put it, you would have had to win the game beforehand—the very same one those bronze medalists lost.
And when people look back later, they see we took home the silver from the championship because we played in the final.
The bronze medalists didn't make it that far.

fadedmason said:It’s actually quite sad—the Pap smear was fine before, but then once I was in New York City, it came back wrong. I can't wrap my head around how that happens, especially since there was only a one-day gap between tests...

This part makes perfect sense to me. When you get a Pap smear, they have to scrape a layer of cells from the surface. If you go back for another sample just the very next day, that sample isn't "clean" because the area hasn't settled. You really can't do Pap smears day after day, or even within the same month. You need a much longer window of time between them.
I remember going for a Pap smear once, and then just ten days later, my company organized a systematic screening at the office, so I ended up doing it all over again. Their results came back much faster and were so well-organized that I didn't even bother picking up the previous results from my doctor. When I finally went back a year later, the doctor actually snapped at me, asking why I hadn't come in sooner to collect my results showing CIN1.

As for doctors who try to steer you elsewhere—look, if you ever deal with something like pneumonia, you'll see how much easier it is to just head to the ER in the middle of the night and get everything handled in one single location.
Just ask for a hospital referral.

Whenever I have a health issue and I simply don't have the energy to chase down referrals or spend hours scheduling appointments, I just head straight to the emergency room (once regular clinic hours are over) and get whatever needs to be done right then and there.

That’s actually how I managed to get an MRI done this year, even though most people are stuck waiting for months.

I have plenty of friends, including some truly best friends.
One of them has been by my side since we were kids in elementary school; we went through high school together, then survived college, and honestly, we’re still just as close today.

I also have two male friends, both of whom happen to be exes.

To be honest, I find it pretty exhausting when people start pushing those tired old theories—you know the ones, claiming that women can't actually be true friends or that men and women can't maintain a friendship without things getting complicated...

For anyone who actually believes that stuff, look: if you can't seem to maintain those kinds of connections, that’s on you. Just because it doesn't work for you doesn't mean it's impossible for everyone else.

Robin Jackson9 said:Why is it that in like, a million music videos, you see these girls playing the violin almost half-naked or just totally exposed on set?
I mean, seriously, they seem way more stripped down in these videos lately....
Why is everyone so obsessed with violinists?
And why am I so turned on whenever I see a woman with a violin?
Look, obviously any attractive woman catches my eye, but when there's a violin involved, it hits me on this whole different, extra special level,

Other guys can try to lie and say they don't feel the same way, but let's be real... everyone's feeling it...

Don't come at me with those "castration complex" or "anima" psychology theories... none of that actually explains it for me.
I started this thread because most other discussions online are just people whining about stuff like "why do I feel so bad, life sucks, I don't know why"... and I don't want to give the impression that psychology is just some study of bad vibes we can't explain. Let's make this a thread for "why does this feel so damn good" (whenever I see a violinist).

Go ahead... feel free to post similar topics here.

It’s the same question I have: why are women in countless music videos where they aren't even playing the violin shown partially or fully undressed? Since nudity is everywhere in media, it would actually be pretty strange if female violinists were the only ones staying fully clothed.

I recently came across an interesting idea that the previous era was defined as a "civilization of guilt"—where we focused on what we did wrong to others—whereas today, we live in a "civilization of shame," where the focus has shifted to how others perceive us. It felt incredibly spot-on to me, though I can't quite recall the specific book or article where I read it.

I know that magnets are sometimes used as a tool during injury recovery; I actually experienced that myself while undergoing physical therapy. To be honest, though, I’m not entirely sure how effective they really are—it's hard to tell how much progress was due to the magnets versus the massage work or the ultrasound treatments.

As for MRI scans, those are diagnostic tools. They're incredibly expensive, and you often have to wait months just to get an appointment. I haven't heard of them being used as a form of therapeutic treatment itself.

Timothy Morgan38 said:from what I can see, being labeled a "person with a mental health disorder" is a socially acceptable diagnosis, whereas being called a "mentally ill person" is a label you're supposed to hide and feel ashamed of...

No, those are two distinct categories—as you put it, two different diagnoses—and I didn't just make that up.
People living with a mental health disorder are held legally accountable, unlike
when someone is actually mentally incompetent in court, where they can argue an insanity defense (which is a far cry from just being stressed out, nervous, or having a phobia of snakes or flying!).

I don't think you're really following my point (and maybe you believe that anyone who gets anxious or stressed is technically mentally ill),
but I'll say it for the third time: there is absolutely no reason to feel shame regarding either situation, but we shouldn't conflate two very different things.

I'm going to end this debate with you right here. But hey, if it makes you feel better—fine, you're right and I'm wrong.😉

Alexander Taylor said:I’m sorry, but I don't see why we need to overdo it with political correctness. If you have a cold, you just say you're sick. You don't say you're "partially sick" just because your vision is fine—that would be the more technically accurate way to describe someone with a cold, wouldn't it?

To me, political correctness is choosing to say "a person with a mental health condition" instead of calling them "crazy."

Saying that anyone visiting a psychiatrist is "a person with a mental health condition" isn't really about being politically correct; it's simply accurate.

For example, someone who stutters (which is a neurological/psychological condition) is a person with a mental health condition.
Similarly, someone experiencing auditory hallucinations telling them to harm their mother is also a person with a mental health condition.

There are very clear medical and legal distinctions here. You wouldn't (and shouldn't) strip the first person of their professional credentials or commit them to a psychiatric hospital. But you might have to for the second person.

The real issue arises when society views the first person seeking psychotherapy as if they were the second person.

Like I mentioned before, neither situation is something to be ashamed of, but I don't understand why we feel the need to conflate the two.

Charles Doyle49 said:Honestly, what’s the point of seeing a psychiatrist? They can’t really help you. If you're struggling, you're better off just talking things out with your inner circle. Trust me, your close friends and family can provide way more support than a whole team of psychiatrists and psychologists combined.

Fair enough, but I have to ask: what exactly do you think psychologists, psychiatrists, and psychotherapists are supposed to do—or what should they be doing?
Psychologists undergo four years of specialized training, psychiatrists go through about eleven, and therapists often spend even longer.
Do you truly believe all that education is a waste of time, or that these professions serve no purpose and should just be phased out entirely?

Timothy Morgan38 said:it looks to me like the main issue here is you.

...

I’m going to pass on commenting on that specific part, since this thread isn't actually about me—I just shared my own experience as an illustration of the broader societal attitude.
If I were embarrassed by what I was saying, I wouldn't have mentioned my plans at all. I’ve sought out help, and I intend to work through everything with my therapist.

But let’s get back to the point at hand.

Not everyone in psychotherapy is suffering from a mental illness. In fact, most people aren't.
People with mental illnesses are those with specific clinical diagnoses—those experiencing significant distortions in their perception of reality, such as hearing voices and things of that nature.

When someone who is professionally trained as a psychiatrist claims that psychiatrists only deal with the mentally ill (which isn't strictly true, or at least it's a massive oversimplification), it really harms public perception. It makes it no wonder that when you tell people you're seeing a therapist, they immediately assume you're "unstable." Even today in American society, there is still this lingering stigma that seeking therapy is something to be ashamed of.

Please try to notice the distinction between being a "mentally ill person" and being "a person with a mental health condition."

Neither state is something to be ashamed of, but there is a huge difference between them, and there's no reason to lump them all into the same category.

(For instance, individuals classified as mentally ill can sometimes lose certain legal rights, like having a guardian appointed or being deemed legally incompetent to handle their own affairs or sign documents.)

How are people ever going to accept psychotherapy as something normal and even desirable—given how nobody is ashamed to work on their physical fitness, yet working on your mental health is seen as a taboo—if everyone who reaches out to a psychiatrist is automatically labeled, to put it bluntly, as "crazy"?