Dabrowski's "Personality-Shaping" back in print!

[latulipenoire]

I've bought a copy of the book yesterday and after reading the introductions (with some fantastic excerpts from Dabrowski's theory) I dare say this is a must read for everyone interested in the Work per se. It's amazing (as Approaching Infinity and others said) how the book deals with psychopathy and personality development, in such a clear language, and its emphasis on morality and idealism.

Also of note is the concept of disintegration of the psyche in two - tutor and pupil, subject and object - as related to process of self-education and perfection of the personality. I can't stress enough how deeply thankful I am for everybody who published this great and necessary work. Once more, thank you.

 

[SummerLite]

Wow latulipenoire!

What an exceptional recommendation, thank you for that. I will need to look at this more closely and add it to my next order of books, perhaps, which I need to make soon. In Search of the Miraculous is on that list as well. What Dabrowski explains are key concepts that provide a solid foundation for this work it seems to me also. I don't believe I've ever heard anyone else describe this process with so much detail. Other sources I've read that have a similar understanding, have seemed much more simplified, not as studied. Very good!

 

[ashu]

This is great news. I was especially intrigued to learn that from the recent blog talk radio show that Dabrowski's books are practical. Ordered a copy, many thanks Red Pill Press!

 

[latulipenoire]

Wow latulipenoire!

What an exceptional recommendation, thank you for that. I will need to look at this more closely and add it to my next order of books, perhaps, which I need to make soon. In Search of the Miraculous is on that list as well. What Dabrowski explains are key concepts that provide a solid foundation for this work it seems to me also. I don't believe I've ever heard anyone else describe this process with so much detail. Other sources I've read that have a similar understanding, have seemed much more simplified, not as studied. Very good!

Thank you SummerLite, I am grateful that I could recommend a book like this one, for I think it truly deserves what people are saying here about it!

I wanted to share some thoughts and observations related to the book and, if I may, about some interrelated scenes of the movie "Good Will Hunting", which I watched some days ago. (Some spoilers below, beware!). Dabrowski writes:

The ideal of personality, conceived schematically, should embrace the fundamental positive qualities of man, not only those that are universal but also those appearing less often, such as open-mindedness, the highest possible sensitivity to human affairs, the faculty for conscious and effective working upon oneself along the direction accepted as one's own. The ideal of personality may, in the most general way, be formulated as follows: Personality is a synthesis of the most essential human values embodied in an individual.

(My emphasis, from position 637, 11% of the book in Kindle format)

What I found of note in the movie was the reciprocal feedbacks exchanged, eventually, between Will Hunting (played by Matt Damon) and Sean (played by Robin Williams). For example, Sean convinces Will that, even though a lot can be learned from theories, books and reading, the only way to live a truthful life is by making choices and risking failure sometimes, being hurt or hurting others in the process. As each one of them becomes more open-minded and trusts one another, leaving aside resistances to real changes, they grow a lot - and we understand why of all the 'shrimps' Will went to see only Sean could help him. Their relationship was not one sided as seen in most sessions of psychotherapy, instead it became a synonym of inner transformation and growth for them.

I also think that Sean had done a lot of self-reflection and inner work before meeting Will (and all along), in order for him to apply what he understood helping others:

We can change and improve the group in which we live, therefore, only if we know how to develop ourselves. Otherwise we vitiate the social work, a cover for attitudes and aims which often have nothing to do with real social work. Thus the reservations made with respect to the social work of individuals possessing no ability for the internal reshaping of themselves, for the realization of the ideal of personality, are fully justified. (...)

(Emphasis mine, from location 856, 15% of the book)

In other words, as Sean could refuse (anytime) to help the indomitable Will, and therefore preserve his status of 'certified specialist' and maintain intact his inner psyche, as those before him did, nevertheless he chose to stay in the boat and navigate those dangerous waters together with an impossible patient, happen what it may. That's what I found so engrossing in the movie, and I was very lucky to watch it while reading Dabrowski's book.

(Interesting thread on another cool dialogue of the movie: https://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php/topic,34176.msg478310.html#msg478310)

 

[SMM]

Thank you all! Absolutely delightful :D

The two-part radio shows on this so far were so engaging that I had to get the Kindle book and dive right in right away! Three chapters in and it's proving extremely difficult to put down. A lot of useful definitions are used by Dabrowski to explain and offer greater insight into occurrences that aren't as easily identified without a frame of reference.

 

[latulipenoire]

An interesting quote from Chapter 4:

A man who faces life with a considerable fund of good will, theoretical knowledge, with a desire for right solutions to problems that may confront him, and with a conviction that he will actually reach a correct solution, comes, after countless experiences, to a conclusion which differs considerably from the original one, namely, that he is not prepared for proper behavior, that he is committing many errors and doing a great deal of wrong because of his shortcoming in his behavior toward people and because of a lack of knowledge or lack of anticipation of effects. These experiences and estimates lead him to the conclusion that he must enrich his mental, intuitional, and moral outlooks, along the principal course on which he is at present heading, loosen, and even disintegrate many schemes, many instinctive mechanisms and impulses, which are causes of his improper behavior. Slow adjustment to the "new" brings about the need to free oneself from undesired mechanisms, the need to widen one's horizons and to secure oneself against new errors. A man, when working to disintegrate the thus far existing stereotype, arrives at a point which allows him to draw energy from the disposing and directing center, which passes to a higher level."

(Emphasis mine)

What came to my mind while reading the above excerpt and knowing about the victory of the "OXI" in Greece, is a hope that maybe the process depicted by Dabrowski may happen to a lot of individuals of a society, thus allowing the multilevel disintegration to affect a whole country? (Countering the pervasive ponerology amid a restricted number of them). I don't know, I'm just hopeful today! :)

 

[Anthony]

We can change and improve the group in which we live, therefore, only if we know how to develop ourselves. Otherwise we vitiate the social work, a cover for attitudes and aims which often have nothing to do with real social work. Thus the reservations made with respect to the social work of individuals possessing no ability for the internal reshaping of themselves, for the realization of the ideal of personality, are fully justified. (...)

It's interesting to note that the Stoics for instance also had what Dabrowski refers to the personality ideal.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sage_(philosophy)

It is the view of Zeno and his Stoic followers that there are two races of men, that of the worthwhile, and that of the worthless. The race of the worthwhile employ the virtues through all of their lives, while the race of the worthless employ the vices. Hence the worthwhile always do the right thing on which they embark, while the worthless do wrong.

—Arius Didymus

 

[Chad]

The intro threw me a bit so i stalled thinking it would be quite a tough book - before i'd even gotten to Dabrowski! But i'm now 30 pages in and am enthralled. It is much easier to read than i first thought.

Having listened to the STR a few times as well as the videos - i couldn't find anything else! - as i've been reading, every now and then, Dabrowski's empathic and encouraging voice would echo back. Dabrowski talks like we have all the time in the world and, for sure, we can find a solution, just "keep going", osit.

My initial thought was that the guy was a mystic - and i was surprised he introduces these ideas at the very beginning and how much correlates with the work here; I haven't read many psychological/philosophical books so can't compare.

I highlighted the following:

The uses of certain emotions, and death:

"[...] as it were, the result of two attitudes, one rational, objective, and critical, and the other emotional and dramatic. The first regards death as a universal process, which affects the given individual as "one of many," whereas the second expresses drama, in which the negation of biological life is associated with the need and sometimes even with the necessity of supersensual life. This drama often gives way to a state of peace and internal harmony, which is connected with the supersensual being through meditation.

A correct attitude of humility, arising from the realisation that we are infinitesimal creatures in this endless universe, from the tendency to assume an objective attitude toward reality, and from the survival of our spiritual beings and a sense of union with the Supreme Being, helps us to overcome the fear of our death and to attain peace of mind"

- that's death sorted then! Seriously though, for me, it reads just like that. But i don't disagree and this may be why his tact would be to just leave people with these thoughts and most will come to similar conclusions; "oh yeah, i'm infinite" (I'm not discounting the work involved to 'get there').

Regarding death, it got me thinking about the first time i'd ever considered it - though i can't remember thinking so much about mine, more so about the people i loved and what would happen to them - apparently i could handle my own death at 8 :P

Another i liked, perhaps because i feel i can relate - in a number of positive and negative ways.

"The greater our experience in life, the greater our sensitivity; the more intensive and thorough our elaboration of experiences, the clearer our ideal of personality; and the more we are apt to sacrifice, to subordinate our instinctive needs in favour of personality, the stronger is our disposition to the attitude of courage and heroism."

- I guess this applies solely to conscious experiencing; one thing Dabrowski seems to focus on, is that we aren't all alike in potential which i appeciate because it explains alot. In that there may have been glimpses on our journey that perhaps we process the world in a different way and that may contribute to the feelings of confusion.

One thing that struck me from the outset of hearing the core theories, is how i experienced a feeling of disintegration long before i came to the forum and it's enlightening material, and, instead, was stuck comparing myself with others in my groups of friends. Needless to say it wasn't until i could identify anything 'higher' that i was able to justify and formulate a plan to remove myself from that life, following which the confusion, in that area, dissipated somewhat.

It seems like a highly practical book and for those who have read some of the suggested esoteric reading, it's even more interesting since he seems to skip along certain fundamentals as though they were widely understood, osit. I can see why some thought he had read Gurdjieff.


So nothing ground breaking from me and i may have misinterperated some but, thus far, i think, it is a truly excellent book.

Thank you to all involved in bringing this back to print!

 

[Keyhole]

It seems like a highly practical book and for those who have read some of the suggested esoteric reading, it's even more interesting since he seems to skip along certain fundamentals as though they were widely understood, osit. I can see why some thought he had read Gurdjieff.

So nothing ground breaking from me and i may have misinterperated some but, thus far, i think, it is a truly excellent book.

I agree, and I am only roughly 40 pages into the book as well. His writing style reminds me of Lobaczewski's style, extremely concise and to the point. There have been many times that I have had to pick up a dictionary and learn the meanings of new words just to really understand what Dabrowski is trying to say. I was also suprised to see how many of his ideas closely relate to those explored on this forum.

One thing that struck me from the outset of hearing the core theories, is how i experienced a feeling of disintegration long before i came to the forum and it's enlightening material, and, instead, was stuck comparing myself with others in my groups of friends. Needless to say it wasn't until i could identify anything 'higher' that i was able to justify and formulate a plan to remove myself from that life, following which the confusion, in that area, dissipated somewhat.

From what I have understood so far, people go through stages of disintegration many times throughout their life time. So it is very likely that you have not only gone through one experience of disintegration, but multiple disintegrations OSIT, although I may have confused the concept. From listening to the podcasts, and reading this far, I gathered that the aim might be to consciously choose to go through positively disintegration when we experience periods of suffering, and to do this at every opportunity. For instance, someone may go through positive disintegration "X" amount of times in their life... Whereas if an individual actively seeks the process of disintegration and has the tools to direct it positively, then they may experience many more positive disintegrations than others and subsequently be closer to the "personality" ideal. IMO this relates to G's ideas of conscious suffering, in some way.

If one does the Work, and continually seeks to learn about themselves and reality (which means facing the horrible truths), it is going to cause them large amounts of suffering, again and again. If they have the aim of SEEing themselves more objectively, it is going to result in more and more internal discomfort and essentially suffering. Everyone knows how it feels to be told something displeasing about oneself, but something that is ultimately true... it feels extremely uncomfortable, and I would describe this as suffering. Rather than dismissing this truth, to actually face it, take the feedback and use the negative feelings experienced to work on changing your behaviour takes a lot of strength. If one understands and has the ability to interact with this suffering and utilize it in a way that helps them develop into a better person, and therefore actively seeks this, then this would be positive disintegration, or conscious suffering... if that makes sense? Perhaps I have misunderstood some things... back to the book for now.

 

[Chad]

It seems like a highly practical book and for those who have read some of the suggested esoteric reading, it's even more interesting since he seems to skip along certain fundamentals as though they were widely understood, osit. I can see why some thought he had read Gurdjieff.

So nothing ground breaking from me and i may have misinterperated some but, thus far, i think, it is a truly excellent book.

I agree, and I am only roughly 40 pages into the book as well. His writing style reminds me of Lobaczewski's style, extremely concise and to the point. There have been many times that I have had to pick up a dictionary and learn the meanings of new words just to really understand what Dabrowski is trying to say. I was also suprised to see how many of his ideas closely relate to those explored on this forum.

One thing that struck me from the outset of hearing the core theories, is how i experienced a feeling of disintegration long before i came to the forum and it's enlightening material, and, instead, was stuck comparing myself with others in my groups of friends. Needless to say it wasn't until i could identify anything 'higher' that i was able to justify and formulate a plan to remove myself from that life, following which the confusion, in that area, dissipated somewhat.

From what I have understood so far, people go through stages of disintegration many times throughout their life time. So it is very likely that you have not only gone through one experience of disintegration, but multiple disintegrations OSIT, although I may have confused the concept. From listening to the podcasts, and reading this far, I gathered that the aim might be to consciously choose to go through positively disintegration when we experience periods of suffering, and to do this at every opportunity. For instance, someone may go through positive disintegration "X" amount of times in their life... Whereas if an individual actively seeks the process of disintegration and has the tools to direct it positively, then they may experience many more positive disintegrations than others and subsequently be closer to the "personality" ideal. IMO this relates to G's ideas of conscious suffering, in some way.

If one does the Work, and continually seeks to learn about themselves and reality (which means facing the horrible truths), it is going to cause them large amounts of suffering, again and again. If they have the aim of SEEing themselves more objectively, it is going to result in more and more internal discomfort and essentially suffering. Everyone knows how it feels to be told something displeasing about oneself, but something that is ultimately true... it feels extremely uncomfortable, and I would describe this as suffering. Rather than dismissing this truth, to actually face it, take the feedback and use the negative feelings experienced to work on changing your behaviour takes a lot of strength. If one understands and has the ability to interact with this suffering and utilize it in a way that helps them develop into a better person, and therefore actively seeks this, then this would be positive disintegration, or conscious suffering... if that makes sense? Perhaps I have misunderstood some things... back to the book for now.

I'd agree with your condensation Keyhole. I think Karen reiterated that it was a continuous (as in throughout life) process on the podcast. The problem is, as you say, it needs to be done consciously. At that moment it was only 'a feeling' i had that something was occurring.

Prior to the forum, all i had were these odd feelings and questions about myself and my friends (my family) and, with no terms of reference, it was more a sensation of disintegration. And i mention it because it sticks out as one of the first times i was able to correlate my thoughts with the feeling that all my references (my friends) were crumbling. As in, if they've got it wrong, then what's right? And how on earth do i find that?

It's only in retrospect and with information that i can identify it and fit it in to the narrative, like how it dissipated and where it got me. I think the idea of shocks and bankruptcy are related, though for me what felt like bankruptcy came much later.

Edit: it may just be the term bankruptcy to my ears sounds severe and perhaps can be taken as 'mini bankruptcies' throughout life, but if i recall correctly, it was used in more significant terms.

 

[Keyhole]

I'd agree with your condensation Keyhole. I think Karen reiterated that it was a continuous (as in throughout life) process on the podcast. The problem is, as you say, it needs to be done consciously. At that moment it was only 'a feeling' i had that something was occurring.

Prior to the forum, all i had were these odd feelings and questions about myself and my friends (my family) and, with no terms of reference, it was more a sensation of disintegration. And i mention it because it sticks out as one of the first times i was able to correlate my thoughts with the feeling that all my references (my friends) were crumbling. As in, if they've got it wrong, then what's right? And how on earth do i find that?

It's only in retrospect and with information that i can identify it and fit it in to the narrative, like how it dissipated and where it got me. I think the idea of shocks and bankruptcy are related, though for me what felt like bankruptcy came much later.

Edit: it may just be the term bankruptcy to my ears sounds severe and perhaps can be taken as 'mini bankruptcies' throughout life, but if i recall correctly, it was used in more significant terms.

Ah ok, now I understand what you meant in your original post. You experienced the feelings of disintegration, yet were not equipped with the knowledge of 1. What the process actually was. 2. How to deal with the process, so it made the whole process a whole lot harder and rather blurry (for me it did anyway)! I guess after studying this work, you might find that you are better able to identify these processes and can gain more from your experiences of suffering, and hopefully move closer toward "personality" :).

I think the main point to emphasize is that with "no point of reference", its like we are really just wondering about, alone in the dark so to speak. This is why a network is so beneficial, and building up a relationship with those "teachers" who can guide one on the path leading from darkness into the light of higher awareness. Totally different line of thought, but it appears to me that there are many "truth-seekers" who are also reluctant to acknowledge the benefits of having those who can act as teachers, and I think this is an ego-problem which is something that prevents others from joining a network/group perhaps. The reason I say this is that I am pleased Dabrowski recognises the importance of this teacher-student dynamic. He was really onto something!

 

[Chad]

I'd agree with your condensation Keyhole. I think Karen reiterated that it was a continuous (as in throughout life) process on the podcast. The problem is, as you say, it needs to be done consciously. At that moment it was only 'a feeling' i had that something was occurring.

Prior to the forum, all i had were these odd feelings and questions about myself and my friends (my family) and, with no terms of reference, it was more a sensation of disintegration. And i mention it because it sticks out as one of the first times i was able to correlate my thoughts with the feeling that all my references (my friends) were crumbling. As in, if they've got it wrong, then what's right? And how on earth do i find that?

It's only in retrospect and with information that i can identify it and fit it in to the narrative, like how it dissipated and where it got me. I think the idea of shocks and bankruptcy are related, though for me what felt like bankruptcy came much later.

Edit: it may just be the term bankruptcy to my ears sounds severe and perhaps can be taken as 'mini bankruptcies' throughout life, but if i recall correctly, it was used in more significant terms.

Ah ok, now I understand what you meant in your original post. You experienced the feelings of disintegration, yet were not equipped with the knowledge of 1. What the process actually was. 2. How to deal with the process, so it made the whole process a whole lot harder and rather blurry (for me it did anyway)! I guess after studying this work, you might find that you are better able to identify these processes and can gain more from your experiences of suffering, and hopefully move closer toward "personality" :).

Yes, i also think you were quick to misinterpret that i was saying that it occurs once (?); i was simply commenting on one instance which i can recall quite vividly. And it seems to correlate with Dabrowksi's comments on the initial feelings of 'otherness'.

I think the main point to emphasize is that with "no point of reference", its like we are really just wondering about, alone in the dark so to speak. This is why a network is so beneficial, and building up a relationship with those "teachers" who can guide one on the path leading from darkness into the light of higher awareness. Totally different line of thought, but it appears to me that there are many "truth-seekers" who are also reluctant to acknowledge the benefits of having those who can act as teachers, and I think this is an ego-problem which is something that prevents others from joining a network/group perhaps. The reason I say this is that I am pleased Dabrowski recognises the importance of this teacher-student dynamic. He was really onto something!

To add to that comment, would be the self education as mentioned by Dabrowski, which comes following disintegration:

"Self education is the highest possible process of a psychological and moral character. it begins at a time when the individual undergoes changes which permit him to make himself partially independent and of the influence of the social environment"
[...]
In order to educate himself a man should, as it were, split himself into a subject and an object - that is, he should disintegrate. He must be the one who educates and the one who is educated and he must isolate in himself the active entity and the one which is subordinated to it."

I would concur that these researchers skip a step; they self educate but for their own reasons don't submit their findings to a network, which leads to all kinds of problems.

Having read further on, i think i've answered some of my initial questions, and i, too, will read on before i speculate any further (because he usually says it on the next page!) . But to answer those thoughts about shocks and bankruptcy; it does appear that Dabrowski acknowledges there is often a singular moment (though it may be weeks, months and in my instance i think a few years before it plays out) that is more significant than others. I think this may tie in to bankruptcy and Mouravieff's comments on lies; that we, and our world, is led by them. Ie. one of the bigger illusions to get rid of.

This was one of the first passages i read after commenting:

"there ensues a period of struggle, calling not only for the pleasant feeling of freeing oneself from activities of former structures, but sometimes also for the breaking of the bonds with the structure , which one no longer considers one's own, as it is no longer essential [...] one falls into deep critical tensions [...] "There comes a moment," writes Dawid, "when a feeling and thinking man says to himself: i can no longer live like this. I must find for myself a 'new form of life and not a new form of cognisance,"
[...]
The idea, in this seeking, is to find a the new essence of existence, in another dimensions, and this is accompanied by a person drama one must go through."

Which for me reads quite like how i experienced that period. In some instances it could simply be referred to as waking up, and we know that that also comes in many stages too.

Perhaps these moments of disintegration vary in duration, in frequency, and in intensity with the idea being that as you progress they happen less often and you're much more prepared to navigate them. You can only see the emperor naked once right? Unless you fall back to sleep, i guess. As mentioned in the podcast these instances often occur around milestones in ones life; adolescence and so on. And it would appear that most people are faced with the same problems:'the world is full of lies' as well as 'so is my family', and i guess its just a case of when you come to confronting these issues.

It seems the initial shock, in my experience, came from that feeling that somthing wasn't quite right, this led to mild depression and anxiety, followed by a few years of self medication and aimlessness; i also experienced that excitement that Dabrowksi mentions, the feeling of something new coming soon. And i made the mistake of telling my friends.

I'm up to the bit where Dabrowkski is talkng about the finer energies and impressions, that we need to sort through those and keep only what is ours. The guy can sum up some heavy stuff in a few lines. I have begun to struggle a bit more with the reading as he's getting more in-depth! :)

 

[Keyhole]

Yes, i also think you were quick to misinterpret that i was saying that it occurs once (?); i was simply commenting on one instance which i can recall quite vividly. And it seems to correlate with Dabrowksi's comments on the initial feelings of 'otherness'.

Yeah I agree, looking back I think I was quick to misinterpret what you were saying and made that assumption, so I apologise for that itellsya.

 

[Chad]

Yes, i also think you were quick to misinterpret that i was saying that it occurs once (?); i was simply commenting on one instance which i can recall quite vividly. And it seems to correlate with Dabrowksi's comments on the initial feelings of 'otherness'.

Yeah I agree, looking back I think I was quick to misinterpret what you were saying and made that assumption, so I apologise for that itellsya.

No worries :) Thanks Keyhole.

And to be fair, i've been jumping ahead of myself...

Added: I'm finding this book very therapeutic.

 

[placematt]

Hey everyone :)

I too am reading this book. Roughly half way through it and it's truly an awesome and insightful read. Not only do i feel very lucky to be reading this book, but I'm getting so much more out of it than just a read. I agree there's a lot of practical advice in this book and I enjoy the different sections especially, for me the small bit regarding love. This to me was the best "definition" of actual love I have seen or know of and it has really got me thinking.

"if, however, we consider love based not only on sexual drive, but love in which strong sexual drive are harmonised and subordinated to the whole personality, love that makes both parties penetrate each other in a perpetual desire to improve themselves and perfect the union. - (Dabrowski,. 2015., p, 17)

I know I'm going to have to read this book a few times to grasps everything and even then i wont be close :). Though, upon first read, i feel the main respect or what I'm defining as the intent which is subjective, would be a pat on the back.

As dabrowski explains disintegration as conflict. I really enjoy the positive perception it alots. If only i had read this book in high school. but failing that. I can't wait to finish it and restart it.

Added: I'm finding this book very therapeutic.

+1.

exactly how i feel Itellsya. Just a slight pat on the back. "Its gonna be ok and if it isn't even better for you to grow" this is how i would sum up my regard of this book at the moment and it's very powerful.

I agree, and I am only roughly 40 pages into the book as well. His writing style reminds me of Lobaczewski's style, extremely concise and to the point. There have been many times that I have had to pick up a dictionary and learn the meanings of new words just to really understand what Dabrowski is trying to say. I was also suprised to see how many of his ideas closely relate to those explored on this forum.

Hey keyhole, I'm in the same boat. Always pulling out the dictionary or heading to google for a translation. If anything my vocabulary will enhance itself. :)but there is so much value on offer.

From what I have understood so far, people go through stages of disintegration many times throughout their life time. So it is very likely that you have not only gone through one experience of disintegration, but multiple disintegrations OSIT, although I may have confused the concept. From listening to the podcasts, and reading this far, I gathered that the aim might be to consciously choose to go through positively disintegration when we experience periods of suffering, and to do this at every opportunity. For instance, someone may go through positive disintegration "X" amount of times in their life... Whereas if an individual actively seeks the process of disintegration and has the tools to direct it positively, then they may experience many more positive disintegrations than others and subsequently be closer to the "personality" ideal. IMO this relates to G's ideas of conscious suffering, in some way.

If one does the Work, and continually seeks to learn about themselves and reality (which means facing the horrible truths), it is going to cause them large amounts of suffering, again and again. If they have the aim of SEEing themselves more objectively, it is going to result in more and more internal discomfort and essentially suffering. Everyone knows how it feels to be told something displeasing about oneself, but something that is ultimately true... it feels extremely uncomfortable, and I would describe this as suffering. Rather than dismissing this truth, to actually face it, take the feedback and use the negative feelings experienced to work on changing your behaviour takes a lot of strength. If one understands and has the ability to interact with this suffering and utilize it in a way that helps them develop into a better person, and therefore actively seeks this, then this would be positive disintegration, or conscious suffering... if that makes sense? Perhaps I have misunderstood some things... back to the book for now.

I think to summarise for me, is that positive disintegration is the reaction to suffering. Through these reactions which can be positive, this Sufferering can lead to what dabrowski's says is personality and i wonder if that coincides with G's essence?. But yeah, really enjoying this book. amazon cancelled on me the first time but now i have it and I'm so glad :)

Happy reading!!