| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
n/a
560 Posts |
 Posted - 03/29/2006 : 20:15:36
|
For those who have not picked up Sarno's new book it is essential that you purchase it as soon as you can. It is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay more in depth that his other books and many of the questions that keep popping up on this forum are directly answered in this book. Many gems to ponder over. I will write more about it once I fully complete reading the book. His other books look amaturish along side this book.
see:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0060851783/ref=pe_snp_783/002-6398930-4264858?n=283155 |
|
|
gevorgyan
115 Posts |
Posted - 03/31/2006 : 04:39:21
|
Peter,
what about the language? is it easy written-I mean for foreigners like I am. Is it sense to buy it or better wait for translation?
the translation of MBP was after 7 years |
 |
|
|
n/a
560 Posts |
Posted - 04/01/2006 : 14:06:19
|
| The book is a lot more complex for first timers and I would not recommend it for those who have not read Sarno's previous works. For a person who as weak English skills the book will be difficult as it is written at a more scholarily level. |
|
|
|
wrldtrv
666 Posts |
Posted - 04/02/2006 : 23:23:32
|
| I just took at look at the new book in B&N. It seems Sarno wrote half of it and the other half if written by various other TMS docs, eg Sopher...which might be a good thing because of the different perspectives. |
|
|
|
n/a
560 Posts |
Posted - 04/03/2006 : 05:49:56
|
| there is really not that much difference in perspective between the authors in the book |
|
|
|
gevorgyan
115 Posts |
Posted - 04/04/2006 : 07:19:17
|
Peter,
can you tell me what "the divided mind" is according to dr Sarno?
m |
|
|
|
vnwees
64 Posts |
Posted - 04/07/2006 : 20:15:06
|
peter,
i'm new to this site as of yesterday where i read your message about the new book. i ran to the bookshop and picked up a copy. thanks so much for spreading the news! i've been "sarnosized" since 1998. best, vicki |
|
|
|
wrldtrv
666 Posts |
Posted - 04/08/2006 : 09:50:14
|
| The divided mind according to Sarno is the conscious vs the unconscious minds. |
|
|
|
gevorgyan
115 Posts |
Posted - 04/08/2006 : 10:58:47
|
so, nihil novis,
I hoped he will neglect Freud at last.... |
|
|
|
Juno
Canada
11 Posts |
Posted - 04/09/2006 : 23:24:36
|
I absolutely connected with this latest book. I feel like it provides a lot more supporting evidence, and there is a much more coherent treatment section.
What do you mean, nihil novis? What would you expect him to talk about other than Freud? I haven't read a lot of posts here lately so I don't know if there are other theories out there, but do you have some? |
|
|
|
Dave
USA
1864 Posts |
Posted - 04/10/2006 : 07:37:46
|
quote:
Originally posted by gevorgyan
I hoped he will neglect Freud at last....
Sarno's entire theory is based on Freud.
|
|
|
|
Michele
249 Posts |
Posted - 04/10/2006 : 08:13:17
|
Great book, and I've read his other 2 as well. This one, for some reason, brought tears to my eyes when he spoke of the id, ego and superego. Apparently I needed to read the explanation in laymen's terms and he does an amazing job in this book. I am about 1/3 of the way through, and reading the treatment chapter right now.
|
|
|
|
gevorgyan
115 Posts |
Posted - 04/12/2006 : 03:21:14
|
of course I have not read it,
but I hoped that dr Sarno will develop his psychological background.
If everything is due to mind it is good for everyone to know more about processes. Lot of scientists now deny Freud theory, so I hoped that dr Sarno will do so.
but, if even cases are the same like in MBP....
where is the difference?
What is the unconscious? Where the unconscious is? Peter, are you 100% sure that we have unconscious?
Finally, who is the unconscious? (if someone have faith in GOD must also be aware of Evil)
I repeat, who can be so bad to make us suffer?
Lots of people here got frustrated after attempts of auto analysis.
Did dr Sarno dealt with some of these topics?
|
Edited by - gevorgyan on 04/12/2006 03:51:44 |
|
|
|
drziggles
USA
292 Posts |
Posted - 04/12/2006 : 09:14:16
|
gevorgyan, if you don't believe in the concept of the unconscious, how can you believe Sarno's theory? It is so central to the idea of TMS...
In terms of what it is, I would propose (as many others would), that the unconscious mind is made up of many substreams of brain function that deal with fairly "automatic" processing of body processes. On the most basic level, that would be things like blood pressure, respiration, gastrointestinal function, etc. On a somewhat higher level, it would be dealing with processing of other items (facts, body mechanics, simple emotions) for example as they are stored as memories.
You can think about this as background processing in a computer's operating system-- While there are many programs you see on your desktop, there are many other things running that you don't even know about unless you specifically look at the task manager. Some are crucial to the successful operation of the system, others are garbage like spyware and other junk programs that waste processing power. However, just because you don't know they are there, they can still slow up the programs you are running, and if things get really bad, they can make your whole computer crash! You can think of a TMS attack as the body's equivalent of the Windows "blue screen of death"... once the stresses in the unconscious reach a critical level, they are brought to your conscious attention in a very dramatic, and sometimes devastating way.
Dealing with TMS symptoms in the traditional medical model would be like taking apart your PC every time it crashes, and replacing the hard drive one time, the motherboard another. How stupid! The real problem is the operating system, and buggy programs running in it. Even though you don't know the program is bad, or maybe even that it was running in the first place, it needs to be found and dealt with.
Now my metaphor is getting really strained, but stick with me... Most of the time, you can use Adaware or Spybot to hunt down the offending program on your own, but sometimes you need to run a program like Hijack This and post it on a userboard for someone else's help (psychotherapy, anyone?).
Does that make sense? |
|
|
|
Dave
USA
1864 Posts |
Posted - 04/12/2006 : 09:42:47
|
quote:
Originally posted by gevorgyan
Lot of scientists now deny Freud theory, so I hoped that dr Sarno will do so.
Sorry to be blunt, but if this is your view, then you can't possibly accept Dr. Sarno's theory.
In his books Dr. Sarno very clearly describes why he feels it is short sighted of the medical community to dismiss Freud's theories. If Sarno was to "deny Freud" he would have to come up with an entirely different idea of how TMS works.
There is no denying that the unconscious mind exists. It keeps us alive on a very basic level. The part that most people deny is that emotions can play a role in disrupting the autonomic functions of the brain.
Freud's concept of the id, ego, and superego should really just be considered a metaphor. At this point in our evolution, no human being can possibly claim to understand exactly how the brain works. The most important part, as far as TMS is concerned, is to accept that there is a part of our brain of which we are not consciously aware and that we cannot overtly control that is responsible for generating psychogenic symptoms in response to emotional factors. This is absolutely fundamental to the concept of TMS. |
|
|
|
gevorgyan
115 Posts |
Posted - 04/12/2006 : 10:54:31
|
Thank you Drzigles, Thank you Dave,
You see, I much more appreciate drziggles's aproache – I am really astonished and impresed
Great job!
I am aware that only having accepted Freud theory one can follow the next dr Sarno steps to recovery. But we have already discussed here about f.e. "Of two minds" by dr Shiffer, where we have two authonomic minds but they can have their own different goals. Non of them is the unconsciuos. For psychotherapists the unconscius is still undiscovered area.
For me thinking about my uncounscious mind is like thinking that I have a bomb in my head.
Thank you that you are patient with me, and once more, drziggles thank you for you desription,
It can be really very helpful.
|
Edited by - gevorgyan on 04/12/2006 10:57:38 |
|
|
|
n/a
560 Posts |
Posted - 04/13/2006 : 14:09:07
|
| It is incorrect to state that "Sarno's entire theory is based on Freud." Sarno came to his diagnosis long before he discovered Freud through his clinical observations. Freud did not have any influence on his work when he discovered TMS. It was later, when he studied Freud, that he found that he unto something. In fact, in his latest book, Sarno takes a look at many of the cases diagnosed by Freud and re-examines Freud's conclusions in the light of what is known now. Freud was actually witnessing manifestations of TMS or its equivelants, he just did not know it yet. |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
For those who have not picked up Sarno's new book
