Talk:Subpersonality

Grammar
A very interesting topic, but I am confused by some of the language used. For example is it the response of the harsh critic, or is it that the harsh critic responds to provocation? I think this could be written in a clearer manner:


 * For example, if a harsh critic respond [sic] with judgmental thoughts, anger, superior feelings, critical words, punitive action, and/or tense physiology when confronted with her own and/or others' fallibility, that is the subpersonality of the harsh critic kicking in to cope with the confrontation situation.

Also - why a harsh critic? Does this have particular resonance within discussion of the topic, or is it merely a good example of the phenomenon?

In addition, I have problem with the following sentence, in which the quotation doesn't make sense in the context of the sentence containing it. Not negative surely? Negate might make more sense here, but may not in discussion of the topic.


 * American transpersonal psychologist Ken Wilber identifies subpersonality as "functional self-presentations that negative particular psychosocial situations."[1]

Otherwise, keep up the good work! Major Bloodnok (talk) 12:20, 24 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your comment Major. The information that you are confused about came from here on page 444. If you can make better sense of it in its original form, please feel free to revise the subpersonality article accordingly. Thanks. Bebestbe (talk) 16:43, 24 June 2008 (UTC)


 * A subsequent edit earlier today made the two sentences I mentioned make sense. I've moved the final two sentences around so I think the paragraph flows better. Major Bloodnok (talk) 19:26, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

What does "a horizontal phenomenon ... in any vertically orientated stage of life" mean? —Tamfang (talk) 17:18, 26 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I must admit, I was foxed by that one too. I've just had another look at the reference which describes it, and am none the wiser. However, what the reference does seem to be indicating is that the "horizontal phenomenon" actually refers to character types rather than to subpersonalities, so doesn't support the statement in the text. I'll take another look, but I think the text should be updated to remove the unsupported statement. Major Bloodnok (talk) 18:11, 26 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Now, finally, fixed. I removed the offending sentence. Major Bloodnok (talk) 21:03, 22 September 2008 (UTC)