Psychology

[Winter wind]

Me: One thing I know for sure is that knowing about a child's developmental stages and being able to recognize passion, gifts, disabilities and creativity are the only way to properly educate someone.

Chancellor: It doesn't take a degree in that quackery we call "psychology" to be able to observe developmental stages or to recognize passions, gifts, etc. in a child.

So does psychology suck?

[Halofan48]

Depends. If the psychologist is biased or prejudice it can contain problems.

[gela]

psychology is increadibly useful.

I analyse people all the time. Its fun.

I definitly think you have to know something about the psychology of children to properly educate them. To organise lessons so it keeps children interested, and to keep things simple enough for kids to understand at different ages.

Basicly, no - psycology doesn't suck

[Kite]

Psychologists aren't all good. Psychiatrists on the other hand are much more useful. Psychologists can analyze sure, but psychiatrists can look at the analysis and tell you whats problems you might have.

[atheist]

Without psychologists, psychiatrists wouldn't have any guidelines/research to base their clinical diagnoses on.

Psychology doesn't suck. That chancellor sucks. He/She is obviously uneducated in the area of psychology. Seems like a nutcase in that aspect. How did this person achieve the qualifications to become chancellor? Now that's a real question.



ADD: If anyone wants to listen in on free UC Berkeley Psychology class lectures, here's a podcast (you can download the lectures) link to people interested in Developmental Psychopathology:
UC Berkeley Webcasts | Video and Podcasts: Psych 131

Developmental psycholopathology isn't too interesting though if you don't have background knowledge on developmental/clinical psychology.

[The Bacon Guy]

Quote by: atheist How did this person achieve the qualifications to become chancellor?

It's his first name.

Personally, I take all psychology with a grain of salt. If psychologists follow rigorously the scientific method and always bear in mind that their conclusions are simply based on generalisations and arbitrary classifications, it can have some very useful applications. However, it's all too often the case that psychology, either due to agenda or incompetence, doesn't take into account the factors I mentioned.

[Winter wind]

Quote by: atheist Psychology doesn't suck. That chancellor sucks. He/She is obviously uneducated in the area of psychology. Seems like a nutcase in that aspect. How did this person achieve the qualifications to become chancellor? Now that's a real question.

Quote by: Bacon Guy It's his first name.

And I died laughing.

If he sees, this, he's going to have kittens.

Quote by: Bacon Personally, I take all psychology with a grain of salt. If psychologists follow rigorously the scientific method and always bear in mind that their conclusions are simply based on generalisations and arbitrary classifications, it can have some very useful applications. However, it's all too often the case that psychology, either due to agenda or incompetence, doesn't take into account the factors I mentioned.

Sounds exactly like Sigmund Freud. (the first part).
Well you could say the same for a lot of science. Psychology just draws the most attention, because it's about what your thinking. You see the same thing with science that challenges the Bible and science that may mean we use less energy. You don't see it with genetics or nano-technology (Since Michael Crichton got away with it). I think it is because that's science that doesn't effect us.

[Chancellor]

In attempting to evaluate the status of psychology, the American Psychological Association appointed Sigmund Koch to plan and direct a study which was subsidized by the National Science Foundation. This study involved eighty eminent scholars in assessing the facts, theories, and methods of psychology. In 1983, the results were published in a seven-volume series entitled Psychology: A Study of Science. Koch describes the delusion in thinking of psychology as a science:

"The hope of a psychological science became indistinguishable from the fact of psychological science. The entire subsequent history of psychology can be seen as a ritualistic endeavor to emulate the forms of science in order to sustain the delusion that it already is a science."

Koch also says, "Throughout psychology's history as 'science,' the hard knowledge it has deposited has been uniformly negative."

The fact is that psychological statements which describe human behavior or which report results from research can be scientific. However, when we move from describing human behavior to explaining it, and particularly changing it, we move from science to opinion.

To move from description to prescription is to move from objectivity to opinion. And opinion about human behavior, when presented as truth or scientific fact, is mere pseudoscience. It rests upon false premises (opinions, guesses, subjective explanations) and leads to false conclusions.

Nobelist Richard Feynman, in considering the claimed scientific status of psychotherapy, says that "psychoanalysis is not a science" and that it is "perhaps even more like witch-doctoring."

Carl Jung himself wrote:

"Religions are systems of healing for psychic illness. ... That is why patients force the psychotherapist into the role of a priest, and expect and demand of him that he shall free them from their distress. That is why we psychotherapists must occupy ourselves with problems which, strictly speaking, belong to the theologian."

Through transpersonal psychotherapies, various forms of Eastern religion are creeping into Western life. Psychologist Daniel Goleman quotes Chogyam Trungpa as saying, "Buddhism will come to the West as psychology." Goleman points out how Oriental religions "seem to be making gradual headway as psychologies, not as religions." Also, Jacob Needleman says:

"A large and growing number of psychotherapists are now convinced that the Eastern religions offer an understanding of the mind far more complete than anything yet envisaged by Western science. At the same time, the leaders of the new religions themselves -- the numerous gurus and spiritual teachers now in the West -- are reformulating and adapting the traditional systems according to the language and atmosphere of modern psychology."

The terms mental disease, mental illness, and mental disorder are popular catch-alls for all kinds of problems of living, most of which have little or nothing to do with disease. As soon as a person's behavior is labeled "illness," treatment and therapy become the solutions. If, on the other hand, we consider a person to be responsible for his behavior, we should deal with him in the areas of education, faith, and choice. If we label him "mentally ill," we rob him of the human dignity of personal responsibility and the divine relationship by which problems may be met.

Because the term mental illness throws attitudes and behavior into the medical realm, it is important to examine its accuracy. In discussing the concept of mental illness or mental disease, research psychiatrist E. Fuller Torrey says:

"The term itself is nonsensical, a semantic mistake. The two words cannot go together ... you can no more have a mental 'disease' than you can have a purple idea or a wise space."

The word mental means "mind" and the mind is not the same as the brain. Also, the mind is really more than just a function or activity of the brain. Brain researcher and author Barbara Brown insists that the mind goes beyond the brain. She says:

"The scientific consensus that mind is only mechanical brain is dead wrong ... the research data of the sciences themselves point much more strongly toward the existence of a mind-more-than-brain than they do toward the mere mechanical brain action."

Many have dishonestly used the term mental illness to describe a whole host of problems of thinking and behaving which should be labeled as "problems of living." Though the term mental illness is a misnomer and a mismatch of words, it has become firmly ingrained in the public vocabulary and is glibly pronounced on all sorts of occasions by both lay and professional persons. Jonas Robitscher says:

"Our culture is permeated with psychiatric thought. Psychiatry, which had its beginnings in the care of the sick , has expanded its net to include everyone, and it exercises its authority over this total population by methods that range from enforced therapy and coerced control to the advancement of ideas and the promulgation of values."

The very term mental illness has become a blight on society. If we really believe that a person with a mental-emotional-behavioral problem is sick, then we have admitted that he is no longer responsible for his behavior. And if he is not responsible for his behavior, who is?

The psychoanalytic and behavioristic approaches preach that man's behavior is fixed by forces outside of his control. In the psychoanalytic approach, man is controlled by inner psychic forces. If man's behavior is determined by internal or external uncontrollable forces, it follows that he is not responsible for his behavior. Thus, criminals are allowed to plea bargain on the basis of "temporary insanity," "diminished capacity," and "incompetent to stand trial." The full impact of the evil unleashed upon society by the psychoanalytical professionals is yet to be realized.

The American Psychiatric Association indicates that a definite answer to the question, "Is psychotherapy effective?" may be unattainable. Their 1982 research book, Psychotherapy Research: Methodological and Efficacy Issues, concludes: "Unequivocal conclusions about casual connections between treatment and outcome may never be possible in psychotherapy research." In its review of this book, the Brain/Mind Bulletin says, "Research often fails to demonstrate an unequivocal advantage from psychotherapy." The following is an interesting example from the book:

..". an experiment at the All-India Institute of Mental Health in Bangalore found that Western-trained psychiatrists and native healers had a comparable recovery rate. The most notable difference was that the so-called 'witch doctors' released their patients sooner."

SOURCE Consider also: Psychology and Science

My own contempt for psychology comes from reading thousands of pages of actual treatment notes over the last several years - especially those where the patients were children. However, perhaps I should use the term "psychotherapy" instead of "psychology."

[Chancellor]

Quote by: Kite Psychiatrists on the other hand are much more useful.

When psychiatrists come up with real testing (such as diagnostic imaging or blood work) that shows a chemical imbalance in the brain actually causing a particular emotional state, then I might be inclined to take them more seriously.

Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder is supposedly caused by a chemical imbalance in the brain (according to some theories anyway). Yet, I've read school reports from teachers where a particular unmedicated students that supposedly has this condition "responds well to structure and discipline." It's also interesting how these kids seem to be selective in when their "disorder" is manifested - it's manifested while in class but these kids can sit through an afternoon of cartoons or sit there and play their X-Box for several hours. How does the chemical imbalance know when the kid is in school and when the kid is at home?

Then, of course, there's this whole thing in the American government indoctrination centers where throughout much of the 1980s and 1990s boys were being treated like defective girls (for more about that, read Boys in Crisis) and what is normal boy behavior has often been labeled "ADHD."

[Winter wind]

Quote by: chancellor Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder is supposedly caused by a chemical imbalance in the brain (according to some theories anyway). Yet, I've read school reports from teachers where a particular unmedicated students that supposedly has this condition "responds well to structure and discipline." It's also interesting how these kids seem to be selective in when their "disorder" is manifested - it's manifested while in class but these kids can sit through an afternoon of cartoons or sit there and play their X-Box for several hours. How does the chemical imbalance know when the kid is in school and when the kid is at home?

ADD does not mean you have no focus. Actually more often then not they have something called "hyper focus" which means they can go into a trance like state to accomplish something.
ADD's trouble is not being able to direct that focus. The focus is great on interesting things. It's like an extreme allergy to boredom.

It is caused by (or suspected to be caused by) a chemical imbalance in dopamine. That basically means the immediate reward system is different. One thing is for certain which is it is genetic.

However, it has been falsely diagnosed in kids who the teacher doesn't like. But that is another issue entirely.

In response to everything else. Psychology works if only at it's basic level. You punish someone, they stop doing it. You reward them, they do it more often.

All psychology I trust is derived-from/related-to the above

[Chancellor]

Quote by: Winter wind ADD does not mean you have no focus. Actually more often then not they have something called "hyper focus" which means they can go into a trance like state to accomplish something. ADD's trouble is not being able to direct that focus. The focus is great on interesting things. It's like an extreme allergy to boredom.

Which is why it's called attention deficit disorder (or, when there's a hyperactivity element, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder) and not attention absence disorder. These kids still have some ability to maintain attention. Of course, from reading various treatment records and school reports, they make it sound as if the kid is unable to focus his attention on anything for any length of time.

It is caused by (or suspected to be caused by) a chemical imbalance in dopamine. That basically means the immediate reward system is different.

Well, when they can actually do testing on live humans that show an actual imbalance of dopamine and actually show that imbalance causing the disorder, then I'll be convinced.

One thing is for certain which is it is genetic.

Now, either it's caused by a chemical imbalance or it's caused by a gene - make up your mind!

However, it has been falsely diagnosed in kids who the teacher doesn't like. But that is another issue entirely.

Much of that goes back to this whole thing of treating boys as if they're really just defective girls.

In response to everything else. Psychology works if only at it's basic level. You punish someone, they stop doing it. You reward them, they do it more often.

I have yet to see psychology "cure" even one person's "mental illness."

[Suburbanite]

Quote by: Winter wind So does psychology suck?

First of all, you suck for making me agree with chancellor.

Secondly, yes, psychology sucks. the stages of development, its all fake, arbitrary and not scientific. The bacon guy really gets it. It comes from freud, and psychologist want to make you think it has changed so much, but ive taken over a dozen psychology and neurophysiology classes, and trust me, THEY KEEP TALKING ABOUT HIM!
Its like a bunch of people made up a few things and got people to believe in, and then those people started using bad science to prove those arbitrary points. Its called scientology. It also sucks.

Understanding a child is important to raising it, understanding a "child's psychology" is like saying it is important to understand a child's faith. It isn't important, it doesnt make sense, and it wont help.

[Suburbanite]

Quote by: Winter wind It is caused by (or suspected to be caused by) a chemical imbalance in dopamine. That basically means the immediate reward system is different. One thing is for certain which is it is genetic.

No, it is caused by boredom. They diagnosed me with ADD in second grade. I never took a single pill. A year later, I was in a highly gifted school, my IQ is over 150, and I'm frankly more aware and better at multitasking than your average human. ADD is a result of boredom.
Aderol is there to make you a good worker bee.

In response to everything else. Psychology works if only at it's basic level. You punish someone, they stop doing it. You reward them, they do it more often.

Thats call the pleasure principle and there is no way in hell I'm letting you claim psychology came up with that!!! hahahaha

[Kite]

Quote by: Chancellor When psychiatrists come up with real testing (such as diagnostic imaging or blood work) that shows a chemical imbalance in the brain actually causing a particular emotional state, then I might be inclined to take them more seriously.

This is exactly why I tend to trust the diagnoses of Psychiatrists rather than psychologists. Psychologists play around with abstract thought concepts and effects of peoples environment growing up, etc. Psychiatrists look at the body to see if there is a physical, tangible reason behind abnormal mental states and behavior. I once heard a report of a man who was diagnosed by a psychologist as being psychotic, but when a psychiatrist examined him in the mental ward it was found that there was an infection in his teeth that had spread up to his brain, thus triggering the psychotic behavior.

Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder is supposedly caused by a chemical imbalance in the brain (according to some theories anyway). Yet, I've read school reports from teachers where a particular unmedicated students that supposedly has this condition "responds well to structure and discipline." It's also interesting how these kids seem to be selective in when their "disorder" is manifested - it's manifested while in class but these kids can sit through an afternoon of cartoons or sit there and play their X-Box for several hours. How does the chemical imbalance know when the kid is in school and when the kid is at home?

Ironically, I actually have ADHD, and I know exactly what you are talking about. From my understanding, as told to me from various doctors, the reason for a difference in response to students that are medicated and unmedicated to a change in structure and discipline is simply that different people have different severities of the disease. I have a severe form of ADHD, and my mother opted to go with medications when I was in Kindergarten. As to the difference in focus between in school and at home, it simply has to do with a persons enthusiasm for whatever they are doing. Even in normal people, if someone is disinterested in a particular subject they wont pay as much attention to it. This lack of interest is exaggerated in people with ADHD and manifests as an inability to focus on it.

Then, of course, there's this whole thing in the American government indoctrination centers where throughout much of the 1980s and 1990s boys were being treated like defective girls (for more about that, read Boys in Crisis) and what is normal boy behavior has often been labeled "ADHD."

Trust me, ADHD is a very real disorder, even though it is frequently misdiagnosed.

[Kite]

Quote by: Suburbanite No, it is caused by boredom. They diagnosed me with ADD in second grade. I never took a single pill. A year later, I was in a highly gifted school, my IQ is over 150, and I'm frankly more aware and better at multitasking than your average human. ADD is a result of boredom. Aderol is there to make you a good worker bee.

Actually winter is correct, real ADD/ADHD is caused by a lack or improper processing of dopamine. You were most likely misdiagnosed with it since it was something of a hot topic in teacher circles. You would get bored in your class, and perhaps start to draw a picture. I would be listening to the teacher, then I would see a poster on a wall and start reading it, then I would become interested in the artwork used on the poster, and then I would decide to draw a picture of my own. Many times kids were diagnosed with it simply because they were bored. Also, having ADD/ADHD has no bearing on your intelligence. I myself have an IQ of 142 and most people say I am very smart. Adderal is there to supplement the amount of dopamine in my brain so that I can focus on things that would normally not pique my interest so that I can function in a working environment. Trust me, I have not had my medication for nearly 6 months, and I can definitely say that there is a difference.

Thats call the pleasure principle and there is no way in hell I'm letting you claim psychology came up with that!!! hahahaha

I agree with that.

[Winter wind]

OK, that makes three people diagnosed with ADD/ADHD on this site. (a pattern). I've got it too. I should do a survey on this...

Quote by: Suburb No, it is caused by boredom. They diagnosed me with ADD in second grade. I never took a single pill. A year later, I was in a highly gifted school, my IQ is over 150, and I'm frankly more aware and better at multitasking than your average human. ADD is a result of boredom. Aderol is there to make you a good worker bee.

I've got ADD too, and I know what your talking about, but I disagree with you. I've met plenty of smarter people react to boredom better then I. They don't roll their eyes and think about something else in class, they focus even if they don't like it.

ADD is really just an allergy to boredom. It has less correlation with intelligence (though many of the intelligent people I've met have ADD in some form.)

Quote by: Chancellor Well, when they can actually do testing on live humans that show an actual imbalance of dopamine and actually show that imbalance causing the disorder, then I'll be convinced.

SPECT scans found people with ADHD to have reduced blood circulation,[18] and a significantly higher concentration of dopamine transporters in the striatum which is in charge of planning ahead.[19][20] A study by the U.S. Department of Energy’s Brookhaven National Laboratory in collaboration with Mount Sinai School of Medicine in New York suggest that it is not the dopamine transporter levels that indicate ADHD, but the brain's ability to produce dopamine itself. The study was done by injecting 20 ADHD subjects and 25 control subjects with a radiotracer that attaches itself to dopamine transporters. The study found that it was not the transporter levels that indicated ADHD, but the dopamine itself. ADHD subjects showed lower levels of dopamine across the board. They speculated that since ADHD subjects had lower levels of dopamine to begin with, the number of transporters in the brain was not the telling factor. In support of this notion, plasma homovanillic acid, an index of dopamine levels, was found to be inversely related not only to childhood ADHD symptoms in adult psychiatric patients, but to "childhood learning problems" in healthy subjects as well.[21]

Ya it's from wiki, but if you really care so much, I can post the citations.

Now, either it's caused by a chemical imbalance or it's caused by a gene - make up your mind!

................Even I know what's wrong with the above argument....

The gene causes the chemical imbalance.

Quote by: Chancellor I have yet to see psychology "cure" even one person's "mental illness."

I have seen it cure PTSD.

Quote by: suburb Thats call the pleasure principle and there is no way in hell I'm letting you claim psychology came up with that!!! hahahaha

Psychology isn't something that can come up with anything, it's a field of study. All I'm stating is what you learn day one in Psych 101.

While I'm not into the deeper stuff, I think there are certain concepts in Psych you can't completely pitch out. One is the average person learns 90% of something that is interesting to them and 10% when it isn't. The average number of times something needs to be repeated to become a habit is around 30.

[Chancellor]

Quote by: Winter wind Ya it's from wiki, but if you really care so much, I can post the citations.

It's a shame you feel you must rely on Wikipedia instead of posting from valid sources. Of course, what you quoted shows that you likely have piss-poor reading comprehension. Notice what I said: "Well, when they can actually do testing on live humans that show an actual imbalance of dopamine and actually show that imbalance causing the disorder, then I'll be convinced." What you quoted showed that testing was done on people already labeled as having ADHD. The testing you cited did not show an actual imbalance of dopamine actually causing the disorder. Here's what I want from those who insist that ADHD is a medical condition - and in exactly this order: 1) diagnostic imaging and/or laboratory testing showing the alleged cause (dopamine imbalance or whatever); 2) diagnosis; 3) treatment. In the case of what you cited, the diagnosis was made before the so-called testing.

................Even I know what's wrong with the above argument.... The gene causes the chemical imbalance.

Wrong, as usual. Try reading what people write before making remarks like the one you made here. The person to whom I responded (with what you quoted) said the ADHD was genetic. But before then the person said the ADHD was caused by a chemical imbalance. Now, it has to be either one or the other. Saying the gene causes the imbalance (which is something that has not been proven since there is no test that can be performed on live humans that specifically show a gene actually causing a chemical imbalance) is not the same thing as saying a gene causes ADHD.

I have seen it cure PTSD.

I doubt that very much - especially since you said psychology is a field of study.

[Kite]

Since you seem to struggle with the interpretation of words, I will put this in simple terms.

They did the testing on people that had the disorder in order to find out what caused it. They found that the people that had ADHD have a lower level of dopamine in their brains than people that had normal mental health. You diagnose diseases through symptoms, you do blood tests to confirm.
This is very basic: Person exhibits the symptoms of Tuberculosis, the person has blood work done, the diagnosis is confirmed, and you treat it with TB meds.
This is another way of diagnosis: Person has symptoms of ADHD, you prescribe an ADHD med, and if the persons condition improves, it confirms the diagnosis.

Next,

I was born with brain cells with a genetic defect that cause them to not produce or absorb dopamine the way they are supposed to. Due to this inability to produce/absorb, there is a dopamine imbalance. The dopamine imbalance causes ADHD. Therefore, since we are logically thinking human beings, the genetic defect led to the ADHD. I honestly don't know how to explain it any more clearly to you, if you cant get it from this then you're hopeless.

[Rainbow]

Quote by: gela psychology is increadibly useful. I analyse people all the time.

Psychology is a very powerful tool.
I agree.

[Lullaby Chainer]

Quote by: Kite Psychologists aren't all good. Psychiatrists on the other hand are much more useful. Psychologists can analyze sure, but psychiatrists can look at the analysis and tell you whats problems you might have.

You've got it mixed up my man.