Would anyone else be put off if their psychiatrist used a hip-hop station as office background music?

I got more of my anxiety medication for my trip to Italy today. I thought my psychiatrist was just being nice by giving me 3.5x the normal number of prescribed pills (so I wouldn't have to bother to get the prescription refilled in Italy) but no, he actually just thinks I'm 3.5x crazier than my previous psychiatrist (meaning 1 tablet 3 times a day as opposed to 1 tablet every other day). Terrific! Though I still plan to stick to my original prescribed dosage; it'll be nice not to worry about prescriptions while I'm away.

I've been stuggling lately with the concept of intent and its role in a genuine life. It plays a large part of Reiki therapy; though one is to let the energy flow, without trying to direct its course or the outcome of the therapy, the therapy and power behind it will be stronger if one follows Usui's principles (similar to the eightfold path). Janeanne Narrin, author of One Degree Beyond: A Reiki Journey into Energy Medicine states:

"No one is excluded from learning and practicing Reiki. Age range is not a limitation, nor is sex, body shape or size, talent, intelligence, perceived eccentricities, or occupation... but presence of mind is necessary and Intent is essential.

Three decades ago, IBM researcher Marcel Vogel, concluded two things about Intent:

• Intent produces an energy field.
• Our thoughts and emotions reflect living things around
  us.

Intent is serious business. This takes precedence in the practice of Reiki."

This ideal has always sat well with me: you create in your reality what you put out. This takes into play the concept of karma and gives power to the mind we may or may not quite understand but are able to manipulate and use creatively. It is how one event follows another, one action has a reaction, etc.

Now though, Steve Hagen's Buddhism Plain and Simple sets out the opposite supposition. Following an anecdote detailing the change in the author's emotion towards a vandalization when it turned out the perpetrator was an animal and not a malicious human being, the author writes:

"We often think the purpose of taking up a spiritual practice is to produce good actions as opposed to bad. According to the buddha-dharma, however, this is completely beside the point.

The point is, rather, that we become aware of when and how we act out of our intent.

Most of us, most of the time, tend to act with intent, trying to bring about some desired end. But nature doesn't act with intent. A buddha doesn't either. Acting without intent means acting out of Wholeness--out of seeing the whole."

Hagen presents intent as a problem, as something getting in the way of peaceful living. But without intent, how are we to accomplish anything? I'm not talking making millions of dollars here, but come on, when one desires to relieve himself, one carries the intent to do so! This is necessity! Perhaps these authors mean different things by the term intent. One insinuates grasping, attempting to alter events; the other describes a thought-form, a statement, a decision, an action, with indifference to the outcome. Both theories give credit to the universe to figure things out. Both offer freedom. Maybe that is the synergy between the two.