Reality therapy and the human energy field : working with needs that influence mind and body

There is accumulating evidence that body and mind, or rather the physical and the non-physical, are intrinsically connected. The mechanisms through which reality therapy works on mind and body may be explained via positive dynamics in the central nervous system, the body's biochemistry and the human energy field. The purpose of this paper is to show the relationship between choice theory and the nature of the power centers in the human energy field. Understanding the drivers behind human behavior and facilitating the choice to think realistically and to make responsible choices assists wholeness and enhances the physical, mental and spiritual health.

Shilpa’s filthy hands

The celebrity Big Brother race row centers, in part, on the preparation, handling and consumption of food. While the ritual of formal and informal dining is a key trope of the series, in this instance it is used to construct notions of difference and Otherness. Eating/not eating Indian becomes a symbol of purity and danger: of Shilpa's filthy natural self that somehow lurked beneath her glamorous exterior. If one eats Indian one is consuming the Other, with the potential to be taken over or spoiled by it. Shilpa, then, comes to stand for a complex and contradictory mix of Eastern/Oriental gender stereotypes. However, at the same time, the racialised grammar of representation used to mark her out as Other draws attention to the white bodies attempting to deny her wholeness. In choosing to eat/not eat Indian one opens up a dynamic space for an interrogation of whiteness to emerge. In fact, Jade, Jo, and Danielle become inferior signifiers of national identity in an age of global consumption. By contrast, Shilpa becomes 'surplus value', a supericonic sign that resists the name calling, fetishisation, marginalisation demanded by those on the show. The Big Brother race row may well be a text that directly speaks to the new post-colonial communication flows in place in the contemporary age.

Hagia Sofia (532–537AD) : a study of centrality, interiority and transcendence in architecture

The study by Robin Evans of the centralised churches of the Renaissance explores the idea of centrality, and argues that architecture does not simply invest in one geometric centre. Evans’s analysis makes detours into the histories of theology, geometry and mathematics attempting to find how architecture participates with these fields. In a footnote, he suggests that architecture in its singular artistic physicality ‘suspends our disbelief in the ideal’, offering a world that does not reflect culture, in all its fullness, but rather supplements culture’s incompleteness. This idea reiterates psychoanalytic theories of Freud and Kristeva that qualify the notion of transcendence with the psychoanalytic concept of transference. Architecture, like art, is able to resolve that which in society and in other fields remains a contradiction, giving a picture (albeit fictional) of a harmonious and unified order and wholeness. In this essay, I turn to Hagia Sofia (532–537AD) in present-day Istanbul, a church that marks the beginning of a Christian empire relocated to Constantinople, East of Rome, and built one thousand years before the Renaissance churches discussed by Evans. Hagia Sofia is a building that symbolises the shift towards a domed centralised form, away from a basilica form, and a building that develops an innovative interior. Hagia Sofia is usually observed and described in a devotional manner, as though addressing the architecture of the church is equivalent to a pious person addressing the church itself, and more significantly, addressing the Divine figure of God, through the architecture of the church. Its influence on Islamic mosque design has been noted. What rôle does Hagia Sofia play in the kind of artistic mastery that Evans is proposing, and what other dimensions of centrality and transcendence in architecture are offered by a study of Hagia Sofia?

Design with nature : a proposed model for coastal settlements in Australia adapting to climate change and extreme weather events

The Australian coast is rich in history and is scattered with coastal settlements amongst a contrasting landscape with infinite visual and ecological diversity. These attributes provide the opportunity to create sustainable and resilient settlements, linking the wholeness of a place to the foundation of living in harmony with nature. On the contrary the coastal regions of Australia are facing dynamic changes of population growth including the looming impact of a changing climate. Acknowledging these challenges, the Australian Government highlighted that one of the key requirements for a sustainable future is to establish sustainable settlements that are resilient against the impacts of climate change. Recent government studies and reports highlighted various possible impacts to the Australian coast and regional settlements due to sea level rise with associated coastal recession, extreme weather events, flooding, and prolonged heat waves. Various adaptation frameworks are proposed to deal with this issue, but very few consider the relationship between ecological systems and human built environments. The resilience planning of settlements must consider the co-evolution of human and nature under future climate effects. This paper is thus seeking answers to the question: How can the theoretical principles of Design with Nature (McHarg, 1967) and The Nature of Order (Alexander, 1980) provide for input to a adaptation model for settlements along the coast? Reflecting on a literature review of these two well established theories, the author select key principles from both as input to a ecological design based adaptation model for coastal settlements, which establishes a system of unfolding steps to create sustainable communities that connect with the landscape, and are resilient against future impacts of change.