By whom? I'm serious, Merriam-Webster? Oxford Dictionary? John Locke?
"Our reality is a manufactured lie" - literally all of it? The fact that we have 10 toes has been made up? Trees, mountains? Because that's what you're saying.
Is psychology science?
- Thread starter say what
- Start date
By whom? I'm serious, Merriam-Webster? Oxford Dictionary? John Locke?
"Our reality is a manufactured lie" - literally all of it? The fact that we have 10 toes has been made up? Trees, mountains? Because that's what you're saying.
I think our society is unhealthy for one part and for another part i think that the DSM categorisation is classifying more and more aspects of human behaviour into 'disorders'
I'm sorry to hear that
I didn't say medicine was all bad i said it had some flaws
I want to make a distinction between an unhealthy brain and an unhealthy mind. You can have a healthy brain and an unhealthy mind and you can have an unhealthy brain and healthy mind. You can also have an unhealthy brain and an unhealthy mind and a healthy brain and healthy mind
So humanity has always been insane it just needed to evolve drugs to normalise?
No because people are anxious and big pharma, psychiatry and the politicans are working together to uphold the control system
I didn't say cancer didn't exist before WW2 i said that it has become more prevalent since WW2 because of the use of chemicals
Last edited:
No that's not what i'm saying, that's what you are saying
In the following clip there is a scientific experiment (@9.47) where a test subject is put in a line with a group of other people who are actors. The people are asked one at atime how long a line on a board is. The real test subject is the last in the line and before him each of the actors says the line is actually longer than it is.....the scientists found that the test subject will often agree with the rest of the people even when they are wrong. The test subject isn't just saying that to fit in though, they ACTUALLY perceive the line to be a different size to how it actually is
This is because there is reality and then there is our perception of reality. Reality is objective but perception is subjective. So when you were a child and your parents told you about santa claus and you believed them you were inhabiting a reality where there was a jolly man dressed in red who came each year and dropped presents down your chimney
So what i'm saying is that the perception many people have of how the world works is not the actual reality because they have been given a false perception of reality
[video=youtube;p8ERfxWouXs]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p8ERfxWouXs[/video]
Last edited:
Is that how they treat the mentally ill in Great Britain because it is not how it is done here in Canada. It is actually quite difficult to 'cart people off to the hospital and give them medication' because the rights of the 'consumers' which is the term used by mental health professionals for people who need mental health services are paramount and you cannot administer medication or hospitalize somebody unless they are deemed to understand and agree to it, except in extreme cases of somebody who is a danger to themselves or to others. If anything it can be a problem where caring family members are not allowed to have information that would help them deal with their loved ones because of privacy and personal rights issues and some people who should be hospitalized aren't to protect their rights and end up killing other people or themselves.
Anybody who thinks mental health issues are a modern problem should have their heads examined 
. There has always been people dealing with mental health issues but they were considered 'possessed by demons' and if exorcisms or prayer didn't work they were locked away for the duration of their life, or maimed or killed by cutting holes into their heads to fix them.
Here's an article with information on mental illness through the ages.
http://www.studentpulse.com/article...ntal-illness-from-skull-drills-to-happy-pills
. There has always been people dealing with mental health issues but they were considered 'possessed by demons' and if exorcisms or prayer didn't work they were locked away for the duration of their life, or maimed or killed by cutting holes into their heads to fix them. Here's an article with information on mental illness through the ages.
http://www.studentpulse.com/article...ntal-illness-from-skull-drills-to-happy-pills
I used to work in a psychiatric hospital...people got restrained and jabbed in the ass all the time
Some might have admitted themself others might have been admitted
Anybody who thinks mental health issues are a modern problem should have their heads examined
Here's an article with information on mental illness through the ages.
http://www.studentpulse.com/article...ntal-illness-from-skull-drills-to-happy-pills
I don't think anyone has said that people haven't experienced anxiety in the past
What i personally have been saying is that the system is creating a categorisation schema through which they can deem any form of behaviour to be a 'disorder' and thereby they can legally incarcerate and chemically cosh ANYONE under ANY pretext if they are deemed a subversive
You may sit back and say ''well i'm not a subversive so what do i care''
But 5 years from now the system might move the goalposts. They might suddenly say that your son MUST join the new national service and be sent off to fight abroad in a proxy war against the chinese
You might decide to join a protest against such an action where your face is identified by the feds facial recogntition software and that night you get a visit from the authorities who want to give you a psyche evaluation as you have been found committing 'subversive behaviours'
I mentioned adam curtis's documentary 'the century of the self' before but i think on reflection it is Curtis's documntary 'the trap' that looks at the huge psychiatric test they did on soldiers after WW2
If that is the one...it is well worth a watch (i can't find it online...it used to be easy to find but now BBC worldwide have blocked it on copyright reasons)
It also looks at the role game theory has had in shaping our society....as i say...well worth a watch
If that is the one...it is well worth a watch (i can't find it online...it used to be easy to find but now BBC worldwide have blocked it on copyright reasons)
It also looks at the role game theory has had in shaping our society....as i say...well worth a watch
Ugh, there is alot to talk about this, but I'm so lazy...Anybody who thinks mental health issues are a modern problem should have their heads examined
Here's an article with information on mental illness through the ages.
http://www.studentpulse.com/article...ntal-illness-from-skull-drills-to-happy-pills
I just want to say that the old methods, like torturing rooms were much more result driven. Interesting, huh?
http://www.cchr.org/quick-facts/real-disease-vs-mental-disorder.html
Psychiatric disorders are not medical diseases. There are no lab tests, brain scans, X-rays or chemical imbalance tests that can verify any mental disorder is a physical condition. This is not to say that people do not get depressed, or that people can’t experience emotional or mental duress, but psychiatry has repackaged these emotions and behaviors as “disease” in order to sell drugs. This is a brilliant marketing campaign, but it is not science.
“…modern psychiatry has yet to convincingly prove the genetic/biologic cause of any single mental illness…Patients [have] been diagnosed with ‘chemical imbalances’ despite the fact that no test exists to support such a claim, and…there is no real conception of what a correct chemical balance would look like.” —Dr. David Kaiser, psychiatrist
“There’s no biological imbalance. When people come to me and they say, ‘I have a biochemical imbalance,’ I say, ‘Show me your lab tests.’ There are no lab tests. So what’s the biochemical imbalance?” —Dr. Ron Leifer, psychiatrist
“All psychiatrists have in common that when they are caught on camera or on microphone, they cower and admit that there are no such things as chemical imbalances/diseases, or examinations or tests for them. What they do in practice, lying in every instance, abrogating [revoking] the informed consent right of every patient and poisoning them in the name of ‘treatment’ is nothing short of criminal.” —Dr. Fred Baughman Jr., Pediatric Neurologist
“Psychiatry makes unproven claims that depression, bipolar illness, anxiety, alcoholism and a host of other disorders are in fact primarily biologic and probably genetic in origin…This kind of faith in science and progress is staggering, not to mention naïve and perhaps delusional.” —Dr. David Kaiser, psychiatrist
While “there has been no shortage of alleged biochemical explanations for psychiatric conditions…not one has been proven. Quite the contrary. In every instance where such an imbalance was thought to have been found, it was later proven false.” —Dr. Joseph Glenmullen, Harvard Medical School psychiatrist
“The theories are held on to not only because there is nothing else to take their place, but also because they are useful in promoting drug treatment.” —Dr. Elliott Valenstein Ph.D., author of Blaming the Brain
“There is no blood or other biological test to ascertain the presence or absence of a mental illness, as there is for most bodily diseases. If such a test were developed…then the condition would cease to be a mental illness and would be classified, instead, as a symptom of a bodily disease.” —Dr. Thomas Szasz, Professor Emeritus of Psychiatry, New York University Medical School, Syracuse
“I believe, until the public and psychiatry itself see that DSM labels are not only useless as medical ‘diagnoses’ but also have the potential to do great harm—particularly when they are used as means to deny individual freedoms, or as weapons by psychiatrists acting as hired guns for the legal system.” —Dr. Sydney Walker III, psychiatrist
“No biochemical, neurological, or genetic markers have been found for Attention Deficit Disorder, Oppositional Defiant Disorder, Depression, Schizophrenia, anxiety, compulsive alcohol and drug abuse, overeating, gambling or any other so-called mental illness, disease, or disorder.” —Bruce Levine, Ph.D., psychologist and author of Commonsense Rebellion
“Unlike medical diagnoses that convey a probable cause, appropriate treatment and likely prognosis, the disorders listed in DSM-IV are terms arrived at through peer consensus.” —Tana Dineen Ph.D., Canadian psychologist
Psychiatric disorders are not medical diseases. There are no lab tests, brain scans, X-rays or chemical imbalance tests that can verify any mental disorder is a physical condition. This is not to say that people do not get depressed, or that people can’t experience emotional or mental duress, but psychiatry has repackaged these emotions and behaviors as “disease” in order to sell drugs. This is a brilliant marketing campaign, but it is not science.
“…modern psychiatry has yet to convincingly prove the genetic/biologic cause of any single mental illness…Patients [have] been diagnosed with ‘chemical imbalances’ despite the fact that no test exists to support such a claim, and…there is no real conception of what a correct chemical balance would look like.” —Dr. David Kaiser, psychiatrist
“There’s no biological imbalance. When people come to me and they say, ‘I have a biochemical imbalance,’ I say, ‘Show me your lab tests.’ There are no lab tests. So what’s the biochemical imbalance?” —Dr. Ron Leifer, psychiatrist
“All psychiatrists have in common that when they are caught on camera or on microphone, they cower and admit that there are no such things as chemical imbalances/diseases, or examinations or tests for them. What they do in practice, lying in every instance, abrogating [revoking] the informed consent right of every patient and poisoning them in the name of ‘treatment’ is nothing short of criminal.” —Dr. Fred Baughman Jr., Pediatric Neurologist
“Psychiatry makes unproven claims that depression, bipolar illness, anxiety, alcoholism and a host of other disorders are in fact primarily biologic and probably genetic in origin…This kind of faith in science and progress is staggering, not to mention naïve and perhaps delusional.” —Dr. David Kaiser, psychiatrist
While “there has been no shortage of alleged biochemical explanations for psychiatric conditions…not one has been proven. Quite the contrary. In every instance where such an imbalance was thought to have been found, it was later proven false.” —Dr. Joseph Glenmullen, Harvard Medical School psychiatrist
“The theories are held on to not only because there is nothing else to take their place, but also because they are useful in promoting drug treatment.” —Dr. Elliott Valenstein Ph.D., author of Blaming the Brain
“There is no blood or other biological test to ascertain the presence or absence of a mental illness, as there is for most bodily diseases. If such a test were developed…then the condition would cease to be a mental illness and would be classified, instead, as a symptom of a bodily disease.” —Dr. Thomas Szasz, Professor Emeritus of Psychiatry, New York University Medical School, Syracuse
“I believe, until the public and psychiatry itself see that DSM labels are not only useless as medical ‘diagnoses’ but also have the potential to do great harm—particularly when they are used as means to deny individual freedoms, or as weapons by psychiatrists acting as hired guns for the legal system.” —Dr. Sydney Walker III, psychiatrist
“No biochemical, neurological, or genetic markers have been found for Attention Deficit Disorder, Oppositional Defiant Disorder, Depression, Schizophrenia, anxiety, compulsive alcohol and drug abuse, overeating, gambling or any other so-called mental illness, disease, or disorder.” —Bruce Levine, Ph.D., psychologist and author of Commonsense Rebellion
“Unlike medical diagnoses that convey a probable cause, appropriate treatment and likely prognosis, the disorders listed in DSM-IV are terms arrived at through peer consensus.” —Tana Dineen Ph.D., Canadian psychologist
Psychiatry’s diagnostic criteria are literally voted into existence and inserted into the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders (DSM). What is voted in is a system of classification of symptoms that is drastically different from, and foreign to, anything in medicine. None of the diagnoses are supported by objective evidence of physical disease, illness or science. “There are no objective tests in psychiatry, no X-ray, laboratory, or exam finding that says definitively that someone does or does not have a mental disorder.”
—Allen Frances, Former DSM-IV Task Force Chairman
“DSM-IV is the fabrication upon which psychiatry seeks acceptance by medicine in general. Insiders know it is more a political than scientific document…DSM-IV has become a bible and a money making bestseller—its major failings notwithstanding.”
—Loren Mosher, M.D., Clinical Professor of Psychiatry
“The way things get into the DSM is not based on blood test or brain scan or physical findings. It's based on descriptions of behavior. And that’s what the whole psychiatry system is.” —Dr. Colin Ross, psychiatrist
“We can manufacture enough diagnostic labels of normal variability of mood and thought that we can continually supply medication to you…But when it comes to manufacturing disease, nobody does it like psychiatry.” —Dr. Stefan Kruszewski, Harvard trained Pennsylvania psychiatrist, 2004
“In short, the whole business of creating psychiatric categories of ‘disease,’ formalizing them with consensus, and subsequently ascribing diagnostic codes to them, which in turn leads to their use for insurance billing, is nothing but an extended racket furnishing psychiatry a pseudo-scientific aura. The perpetrators are, of course, feeding at the public trough.” —Dr. Thomas Dorman, internist and member of the Royal College of Physicians of the UK, Fellow, Royal College of Physicians of Canada
“We do not know the causes [of any mental illness]. We don’t have the methods of ‘curing’ these illnesses yet.” —Dr. Rex Cowdry, psychiatrist and director of National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), 1995 “The time when psychiatrists considered that they could cure the mentally ill is gone. In the future the mentally ill have to learn to live with their illness.” —Norman Satorius, president of the World Psychiatric Association in 1994
“What’s a cure?…it’s just that it’s a term that we don’t use in the medical [psychiatric] profession.” —Dr. Joseph Johnson, California psychiatrist during court deposition, 2003
Psychiatrists were surveyed about their “fantasies” about their practice. Their Number 1 fantasy was: 1: “…I will be able to ‘cure’ the patient.” The Number 2 fantasy was: “The patient wants to know what his or her problem is.” —Dr. Sander Berger, associate clinical professor of psychiatry at Michigan State University, Psychiatric Times, 1998
—Allen Frances, Former DSM-IV Task Force Chairman
“DSM-IV is the fabrication upon which psychiatry seeks acceptance by medicine in general. Insiders know it is more a political than scientific document…DSM-IV has become a bible and a money making bestseller—its major failings notwithstanding.”
—Loren Mosher, M.D., Clinical Professor of Psychiatry
“The way things get into the DSM is not based on blood test or brain scan or physical findings. It's based on descriptions of behavior. And that’s what the whole psychiatry system is.” —Dr. Colin Ross, psychiatrist
“We can manufacture enough diagnostic labels of normal variability of mood and thought that we can continually supply medication to you…But when it comes to manufacturing disease, nobody does it like psychiatry.” —Dr. Stefan Kruszewski, Harvard trained Pennsylvania psychiatrist, 2004
“In short, the whole business of creating psychiatric categories of ‘disease,’ formalizing them with consensus, and subsequently ascribing diagnostic codes to them, which in turn leads to their use for insurance billing, is nothing but an extended racket furnishing psychiatry a pseudo-scientific aura. The perpetrators are, of course, feeding at the public trough.” —Dr. Thomas Dorman, internist and member of the Royal College of Physicians of the UK, Fellow, Royal College of Physicians of Canada
“We do not know the causes [of any mental illness]. We don’t have the methods of ‘curing’ these illnesses yet.” —Dr. Rex Cowdry, psychiatrist and director of National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), 1995 “The time when psychiatrists considered that they could cure the mentally ill is gone. In the future the mentally ill have to learn to live with their illness.” —Norman Satorius, president of the World Psychiatric Association in 1994
“What’s a cure?…it’s just that it’s a term that we don’t use in the medical [psychiatric] profession.” —Dr. Joseph Johnson, California psychiatrist during court deposition, 2003
Psychiatrists were surveyed about their “fantasies” about their practice. Their Number 1 fantasy was: 1: “…I will be able to ‘cure’ the patient.” The Number 2 fantasy was: “The patient wants to know what his or her problem is.” —Dr. Sander Berger, associate clinical professor of psychiatry at Michigan State University, Psychiatric Times, 1998
Psychiatrists claim that brain scans now show brain changes that “prove” mental disorders, such as schizophrenia and depression, are brain based. There is no scientific evidence to prove this: it remains what the “fine print” in the studies tell you: “suggests,” “may” and “it is hoped.” “It is well established that the drugs used to treat a mental disorder, for example, may induce long-lasting biochemical and even structural changes [including in the brain], which in the past were claimed to be the cause of the disorder, but may actually be an effect of the treatment.” —Dr. Elliot Valenstein, biopsychologist, author, Blaming the Brain
“Psychiatry’s claim that mental illnesses are brain diseases is “a claim supposedly based on recent discoveries in neuroscience, made possible by [brain] imaging techniques for diagnosis and pharmacological agents for treatment. This is not true.” —Dr. Thomas Szasz, Professor Emeritus of Psychiatry, New York University Medical School, Syracuse
“There are increasing concerns among the clinical community that…neuroscientific developments [do] not reveal anything about the nature of psychiatric disorders….” —Dr. David Healy, psychiatrist, director of the North Wales Department of Psychological Medicine
Psychiatrists can’t predict what adverse side effects you might experience because not one of them knows how their drugs work.
Psychotropic drugs are increasingly being exposed as chemical toxins with the power to kill. Psychiatrists claim their drugs save lives, but according to their own studies, psychotropic drugs can double the risk of suicide. And long-term use has been proven to create a lifetime of physical and mental damage, a fact ignored by psychiatrists.
Common and well-documented side effects of psychiatric drugs include mania, psychosis, hallucinations, depersonalization, suicidal ideation, heart attack, stroke and sudden death.
Not only that, but The US Food and Drug Administration admits that probably one to ten percent of all the adverse drug effects are actually reported by patients or physicians.
“No claim for a gene for a psychiatric condition has stood the test of time, in spite of popular misinformation.” —Dr. Joseph Glenmullen, Harvard Medical School psychiatrist
“….modern psychiatry has yet to convincingly prove the genetic/biological cause of any single mental illness.” —David Kaiser, psychiatrist
“In fourty years, ‘biological’ psychiatry has yet to validate a single psychiatric condition/diagnosis as an abnormality/disease, or as anything ‘neurological,’ ‘biological,’ ‘chemically-imbalanced’ or ‘genetic.’” —Dr. Fred Baughman Jr., child neurologist, Fellow of the American Academy of Neurology
“Psychiatry’s claim that mental illnesses are brain diseases is “a claim supposedly based on recent discoveries in neuroscience, made possible by [brain] imaging techniques for diagnosis and pharmacological agents for treatment. This is not true.” —Dr. Thomas Szasz, Professor Emeritus of Psychiatry, New York University Medical School, Syracuse
“There are increasing concerns among the clinical community that…neuroscientific developments [do] not reveal anything about the nature of psychiatric disorders….” —Dr. David Healy, psychiatrist, director of the North Wales Department of Psychological Medicine
Psychiatrists can’t predict what adverse side effects you might experience because not one of them knows how their drugs work.
Psychotropic drugs are increasingly being exposed as chemical toxins with the power to kill. Psychiatrists claim their drugs save lives, but according to their own studies, psychotropic drugs can double the risk of suicide. And long-term use has been proven to create a lifetime of physical and mental damage, a fact ignored by psychiatrists.
Common and well-documented side effects of psychiatric drugs include mania, psychosis, hallucinations, depersonalization, suicidal ideation, heart attack, stroke and sudden death.
Not only that, but The US Food and Drug Administration admits that probably one to ten percent of all the adverse drug effects are actually reported by patients or physicians.
“No claim for a gene for a psychiatric condition has stood the test of time, in spite of popular misinformation.” —Dr. Joseph Glenmullen, Harvard Medical School psychiatrist
“….modern psychiatry has yet to convincingly prove the genetic/biological cause of any single mental illness.” —David Kaiser, psychiatrist
“In fourty years, ‘biological’ psychiatry has yet to validate a single psychiatric condition/diagnosis as an abnormality/disease, or as anything ‘neurological,’ ‘biological,’ ‘chemically-imbalanced’ or ‘genetic.’” —Dr. Fred Baughman Jr., child neurologist, Fellow of the American Academy of Neurology
[MENTION=1871]muir[/MENTION]
I don't think anyone here is discounting the fact that parts of the DSM are inaccurate or false...but not everything in it is untrue. You said yourself, anxiety has been around for ages- and anxiety is in the DSM.
The DSM is really a tool to help students learn about an array of disorders that they should know - and their accompanying symptoms. But many clinicians, as I said before, are using a holistic (or as you said whole-listic) approach - where treatment isn't just a prescribed medication.
The value of the DSM comes from a clinician knowing it's limitations and properly understanding the resulting implications. More importantly, for those people wanting to push psychology to a more "scientific" approach, it's a way to define a set of symptoms in a select population, thus leading to more select and 'scientific' understandings.
You can't want psychology to be more scientific, and then fault them for coming up with measurable definitions to study.
And a footnote to all this: I do truly recognize the impact of the pharmaceutical industry on the progression of mental illness treatments. I recognize, but also believe that there is truth to much of the reality, and that there are many people out there who are suffering from disorders - some of which need to be treated through medication, and others that don't. I just cannot justify tossing the entire idea of psychology away because there might be a segment of it that is bad or wrong. Having worked in a clinic and with patients, I know that there are many people out there that are truly impacted, and have been able to gain so much relief and happiness from treatment (medication and non-medication)
I don't think anyone here is discounting the fact that parts of the DSM are inaccurate or false...but not everything in it is untrue. You said yourself, anxiety has been around for ages- and anxiety is in the DSM.
The DSM is really a tool to help students learn about an array of disorders that they should know - and their accompanying symptoms. But many clinicians, as I said before, are using a holistic (or as you said whole-listic) approach - where treatment isn't just a prescribed medication.
The value of the DSM comes from a clinician knowing it's limitations and properly understanding the resulting implications. More importantly, for those people wanting to push psychology to a more "scientific" approach, it's a way to define a set of symptoms in a select population, thus leading to more select and 'scientific' understandings.
You can't want psychology to be more scientific, and then fault them for coming up with measurable definitions to study.
And a footnote to all this: I do truly recognize the impact of the pharmaceutical industry on the progression of mental illness treatments. I recognize, but also believe that there is truth to much of the reality, and that there are many people out there who are suffering from disorders - some of which need to be treated through medication, and others that don't. I just cannot justify tossing the entire idea of psychology away because there might be a segment of it that is bad or wrong. Having worked in a clinic and with patients, I know that there are many people out there that are truly impacted, and have been able to gain so much relief and happiness from treatment (medication and non-medication)
I don't know what's happening in your country, but in mine there is a lack of spaces to hospitalize people that need it and want it to help them deal with debilitating mental health issues that put them and others in danger so there is no room to to 'incarcerate' people who are subversives. There are very strong laws that make it very difficult to forcibly hospitalize somebody for a mental health issue so the difference between where we are now and where you are suggesting we could be in 5 years is huge and almost impossible to achieve in that time span. I'm not a fan of my present government and I know that our police have imprisoned people who were simply demonstrating and shouldn't have been arrested at all, but none of them ended up in a mental institute. Your idea of where we could be in five years is far-fetched and extremely unlikely. I would rather fight for the rights of people who need help dealing with mental health issues to receive them in a prompt, effective and humane manner than fight for something that is just an imagined idea of what the future could bring.
There are problems with certain aspects of psychiatry and psychology but throwing out the baby with the bathwater is completely irresponsible. I personally don't believe that ADHD is a mental health issue and I know that depression and anxiety can be caused by outside circumstances and I would recommend medication for these types of things only as a last resort but there are many people who have had their lives greatly improved and even saved by receiving the right type of treatment, including medication.
I have to agree with [MENTION=9809]La Sagna[/MENTION] ...this is not what happens here in Canada presently. It's true, that some decades ago, this was an issue - but it's not the issue now...UNLESS you are an extreme case where you may harm yourself or others. But the use of restraints in this case is no more wrong or right than the use of restraints for people who experience violence and/or rage with dementia. Sometimes this is the 'safer' or 'kinder' approach, than allowing them to hurt themselves or another person. In these instances, the immediate concern for harm trumps any investigate of the cause - once they are safe, then it's time to understand why they are like this...sometimes it's not because of illness at all- you would be surprised at how many people are committed to hospitals because of drug induced psychosis.
Psychology is a real discipline when practiced by inteligent and thoughtful people. It's not a science per se, true but that doesn't mean anything, besides that it just compromises the predictability of the results of therapy and stuff like that. And it's obvious, you're dealing with people, there's a relationship behind, you're dealing with their problems, as a psychologist you're offering support, and that means something, regardless of the real solution behind the pacient's problems.
Sometimes it can lead to mental masturbation, and constant rumination/attachment to our own traumas and problems, yes, but then again, there are some really helpful, enlightening and even cathartic experiences when in therapy.
People who claim to have it all figured out, and they're independent and real, and start to dismiss people who search for help, are acting self-absorbed. If you have it all figured out, and you can handle your problems and traumas by yourself, good for you, it doesn't mean that you're an example of independence, and it certainly doesn't mean that people should do the same as you. They're dissmising years of work and study by people who really had something to offer to the world with their insights, with Jung being the first on my list of misunderstood geniuses.
Sometimes it can lead to mental masturbation, and constant rumination/attachment to our own traumas and problems, yes, but then again, there are some really helpful, enlightening and even cathartic experiences when in therapy.
People who claim to have it all figured out, and they're independent and real, and start to dismiss people who search for help, are acting self-absorbed. If you have it all figured out, and you can handle your problems and traumas by yourself, good for you, it doesn't mean that you're an example of independence, and it certainly doesn't mean that people should do the same as you. They're dissmising years of work and study by people who really had something to offer to the world with their insights, with Jung being the first on my list of misunderstood geniuses.
? This makes no sense.
What is the point? To me, your point was highlighting an outdated stereotype of a small segment of psychology. If the story by itself is nothing, then why post it by itself?
Again, this makes no sense. How does this relate to the science of psychology? Torture rooms? Are you talking about medieval times?
Psychology isn't all about experimenting on people to see new impacts ... it's a lot about treating and helping people.
Well i think there is a distinction to be made between psychology and psychiatry
But if you are genuinly interested in finding cures....and for me personally i have heard more sad stories than you would believe...i am definately at a stage now where i really feel that if the tragedies are to lessen then we really need to be taking a new look at our society.....at what it is to be human...at what humans need to be healthy and happy and to then build a society around that
I don't think people want to do that for the most part because many people are in a comfortable rut
They don't want someone rocking the boat and saying that there's work to be done...they'd rather sweep it all under the carpet and drown out the endless stream of tragedies that will ensue
It doesn't. Just search for the definition of science. I won't post it myself, so you can say I post my own definition.
No, that was not the point.
No, the story was not by itself.
Of course psychology is about helping people. All the planet has good intentions, isn't it? I mean that's what I learned from my granny. Of course "it's a lot about treating and helping people". Thanks for reminding me this.