<<Then let's hear your definition of obsessesed.  Are
you trying to say that addiction does not exist and
that that term includes only "physical" addiction?
Are you saying that there is not such a thing as
addiction to something generally healthy (when taken
to extremes)?>>

**  Sure, addiction exists.  I'm suggesting  that people's definitions
differ.  I define an addiction as something that limits a person's ability
to function.  It's difficult to say that this extends to those around them
because others often choose to see someone's 'different' choices as
impacting negatively upon them.


<<What I said is do you consider working 40 hours a
week, followed by a consequent obsession with health
and diet that takes up all of your free time as being
the "American Dream".

In fact, it is part of what has been classically
called the "American Dream"...because, as Hans points
out, the American Dream is something to be wary of.
The "American Dream" says more and bigger is always
better.
More cars, bigger houses, etc.  However when your life
gets consumed by that pursuit, it does not bring
happiness.  I think good health is important.  And
once again, I eat a basically paleo diet and I
exercise regulary.  However, I do think that some
people believe that diet and exercise is a cure-all to
everything or they think that if they just find the
"perfect diet", or pursue diet more rigourously, that
they will obtain super health...All I am saying is
that diet and exercise are not cure-alls....and some
people go on for years thinking that they are...there
is no end to the search because there is always
somebody with a new diet or a new trick.  Very often
there problem (as someone noted) derives from a domain
outside of physiology ...problems with society or
family or "mental problems".>>

**  Thank you for clarifying.

<<But then too, I think, the search for perfect health
takes on a life of its own sometimes.  It becomes a
habit, people's social life revolves around it, it
becomes a sort of religion>>

** As it should.  It's a lifestyle, not one act.  My social life does
revolve around my health.  I won't eat in a restaurant that does not meet my
standards, I won't go places where people smoke, and I choose not to go
places that are very noisy. It doesn't fit my lifestyle choice.


   I go further than this.  I use non-chemical cleaners in my home.  I am
mindful of ecologically sound practices.  I won't purchase certain items
because of the corporations affiliated with them. I invest in stocks of
socially responsible companies  Not everyone needs to make these choices,
but some of feel we do.

  This may sound like obsession to you.  to me, it feels like sanity.


<<Why do I accuse you of psychobabble?  First, you said
I must have issues.  Then you accused Nancy of
"projection".  See, these are very convenient
responses.  Anyone who does not agree with you can be
accused of (1) having issues, or (2) projecting>>

** I suggested these things as food for thought.  They were not accusations
or pronouncements.  Why is anything that raises the hair on your back
psychobabble?


<<I will admit that science has its limitations.
However, some people, in this instance you Siobhan
(and more generally, New Age pop-psychologists) want
to abuse the fact that much of the human dimension
cannot be reduced to scientific formulas.  So, in that
void they preach "subjectivism"...Any old opinion that
sounds good, makes you feel fuzzy, is just as good as
any other.  That's the reason just about anybody who
can find a marketer to publish them can put out any
totally unsupported claim or silly idea that just
happens to enter their head.  Ok, fine. But, I do not
have to be a passive consumer of this fluff.>>

**  Let's face it.  You don't know what I choose.  If you read a couple of
paragraphs above, you know a little more of what I choose.  You're the first
person in 45 years who has ever put my name an "fluff" in the same
paragraph.  I wonder if all who know me have been missing something that you
can see.

<<However, instead of going through the difficult task
involved in moving towards truth, you take the easy
way out, Siobhan.  You just throw up your hands and
say "there is no truth"....anything I think or seems
right to me is true (subjective).  For you appearance
and reality are identical...rather than read your
idiotic pop-psychology texts you should read Plato or,
better yet, Hegel.>>

  **  No need.  I began that at the age of 12.  I don't think I take the
easy way out.  I allow for others' experiences and see them as valid as my
own.  Different languages...different thought processes...different
frameworks for communication.  My strength is in seeing the threads that tie
everything together.

    I'm intrigued...how do you know what I read?  Here's a hint:  whatever
you say, you're probably right, for I read virtually everything I can get my
hands on and have done so since I was 4.

  I see no need to lump everything together and call it garbage.  Pearls are
difficult to find, but they exist.  Sometimes, one statement is just what is
needed to advance one's own thought processes.  I wouldn't want to miss
those small statements.

  Many of the greatest thinkers were maligned, ostrasized and even executed
in their time.  Today, we view them differently.  Do you think people have
really changed that much?

  <<Mind you, I am not condmening spiritual
reflection....however, if we are going to be honest
about it, we have to be wary of this tendency to want
to banish the fear of death.>>

 ** Why?


<<True...but the marketers have found a gold mine.
Playing upon peoples hopes and fears.>>

**  I see it differently.  People act upon their hopes and fears.  How much
discenment they use is totally up to them.  Because people have hopes and
fears, no one should market anything that appeals to these people?  We
wouldn't have much of anything, including food, would we?  Does
"Neanderthin" do this, and is Ray irresponsible and greedy because he sells
his book to people who have hopes and fears?


No, I dont think you are "paranoid" to suggest those
things.  Some people choose to hide their own greed
behind the label "alternative medicine".  Now that
isn't to say that there are not some very good things
in alternative medicine.  However, it is not
SUFFICIENT to say that you are "alternative"...In
other words, just because you claim to be alternative
(hence in some ways opposed to "regular" medicine)
does not mean that you are better, more holistic or
not unethical. So,
I agree with you that the pharmaceutical industry is
greedy and corrupt in the main, that does not mean
that Chopra and company are benign.  The New-Age
industry is a huge one and we need to be suspicious of
profiteers who are riding it like a Trojan horse.>>

  **  Most of those profiteers are the large corporations that also sell
pharmaceutical drugs.

   I don't think we are as different in our thinking as you may believe.
But we are different in how we communicate.

Siobhan