Quotessence
Home / Quotes / Quote by Betty Bethards

Quote by Betty Bethards

“Most people don’t really understand why love makes us vulnerable, or open. It’s because love, to be fully expressed and through your being, begins to eliminate all the fears, all the insecurities and all the anxieties that are inconsistent with itself.”

Quote by Betty Bethards

Book:Sex and Psychic Energy
Create image

Work

Sex and Psychic Energy

Browse quotes and source details for this work. more

Author

Betty Bethards

Browse famous quotes and profile details for Betty Bethards. more

You May Also Like

“Jer šta se krije iza fanatične maske nesrećnog čoveka? Strah i osećanje velike slabosti, nesigurnost i potreba za natkompenzacijom osećanja inferiornosti (psihijatrijskim rečnikom, među fanaticima mnogo je neurotičara, psihopata i psihotičara) i, što je najgore, nevera u veru ili ideju koju ovakav čovek fanatično zastupa; u fanatika , najzad, jača bude vera u demonsku, nego u Božiju moć.”

ReligionPsychologyPsychotherapyOrthodox ChristianityReligijaHrišćanstvo
Book:50 pitanja i 50 odgovora iz hrišćansko-psihoterapeutske prakse
Create image

“Na jedna pitanja odgovor nećemo nikad dobiti i treba ih ostaviti autentičnim mističarima; na druga nećemo dobiti odgovor jer su površna, leteća, previše znatiželjna i raznovrsna. O njima najbolje govori Sveti Nikodim Agiorit (1748-1809) kad kaže: „Čuvati um od nekorisnog znanja i prazne radoznalosti. Interesovanje za mnogo stvari je često plod gordosti; to su zamke zlog duha koji pokušava da nas saplete radoznalošću...Raspredajući o visokim stvarima, zaboravljaju da čuvaju čistotu srca; gordost uma je gora od gordosti volje.” Ima, srećom, i trećih pitanja na koja jedino i dobijamo odgovor, a to su ona koja nas godinama istinski muče.”

ReligionPsychologyReligion QuotesPsychotherapyOrthodox ChristianityReligijaPsihoterapijaHrišćanstvo
Book:50 pitanja i 50 odgovora iz hrišćansko-psihoterapeutske prakse
Create image

“Our implicit theories of why we and other people behave as we do come in one of two versions. We can say it's because of something in the situation or environment: "The bank teller snapped at me because she is overworked today; there aren't enough tellers to handle these lines." Or we can say it's because something is wrong with the person: "That teller snapped at me because she is plain rude." When we explain our own behavior, self-justification allows us to flatter ourselves: We give ourselves credit for our good actions but let the situation excuse the bad ones. When we do something that hurts another, for example, we rarely say, "I behaved this way because I am a cruel and heartless human being." We say, "I was provoked; anyone would do what I did"; or "I had no choice"; or "Yes, I said some awful things, but that wasn't me—it's because I was drunk." Yet when we do something generous, helpful, or brave, we don't say we did it because we were provoked or drunk or had no choice, or because the guy on the phone guilt-induced us into donating to charity. We did it because we are generous and open-hearted.”

Psychology
Book:Mistakes Were Made (But Not by Me): Why We Justify Foolish Beliefs, Bad Decisions, and Hurtful Acts
Create image

“Are all perpetrators alike? No; not everyone feels the need to reduce dissonance by denigrating the victim. Who do you imagine would be most likely to blame the victim: perpetrators who think highly of themselves and have strong feelings of self-worth, or those who are insecure and have low self-worth? Dissonance theory makes the nonobvious prediction that it will be the former. For people who have low self-esteem, treating others badly or going along mindlessly with what others tell them to do is not terribly dissonant with their self-concept. Moreover, they are more likely to be self-deprecating and modest, because they don't think they are especially wonderful. It is the people who think the most of themselves who, if they cause someone pain, must convince themselves the other guy is a rat. Because terrific guys like me don't hurt innocent people, that guy must deserve every nasty thing I did to him. An experiment by David Glass confirmed this prediction: The higher the perpetrators' self-esteem, the greater their denigration of their victims. Are all victims alike in the eyes of the perpetrator? No; they differ in their degree of helplessness. Suppose you are a marine in a hand-to-hand struggle with an armed enemy soldier. You kill him. Do you feel much dissonance? Probably not. The experience may be unpleasant, but it does not generate dissonance and needs no additional justification: "It was him or me ... I killed an enemy ... We are in this to win ... I have no choice here." But now suppose that you are on a mission to firebomb a house that you were told contains enemy troops. You and your team destroy the place, and then discover you have blown up a household of old men, children, and women. Under these circumstances, most soldiers will try to find additional self-justifications to reduce the dissonance they feel about killing innocent civilians, and the leading one will be to denigrate and dehumanize their victims: "Stupid jerks, they shouldn't have been there ... they were probably aiding the enemy ... All those people are vermin, gooks, subhuman." Or, as General William Westmoreland famously said of the high number of civilian casualties during the Vietnam War, "The Oriental doesn't put the same high price on life as does a Westerner. Life is plentiful. Life is cheap in the Orient.”

Psychology
Book:Mistakes Were Made (But Not by Me): Why We Justify Foolish Beliefs, Bad Decisions, and Hurtful Acts
Create image