Psychology's Scorecard
Moderators: Clemsy, Martin_Weyers, Cindy B.
I was glad to hear, Evinnra, that your friends still have some contact. That they could preserve their relationship in some fashion despite their difficulties is a positive sign in the scheme of things. One of the toughest things that I had to come to terms with fresh out of graduate school was my own idealism, in that there's no curing everybody or fixing every troublesome situation, and your friends' lives together are a good example of this. Often progress has to be measured in terms of stemming further decline, particularly when significant illnesses are involved, and that's what's going on here, it seems. In cases like these friends are important, too, so they're lucky to have you, Evinnra.
Cindy
Cindy
If the path before you is clear, you’re probably on someone else’s. --Jung
Although this notion has been dancing around the back of my brain, this is the first time I've seen behaviorism equated with religion (and of course I’m in agreement). Behaviorism is to psychology as religion is to spirituality.I think that the case can really be made either way as far as whether or not psychology and religion are essentially the same. But I also think I can make a case that religion and conditioned/response behaviorism are the same thing too.
I do like frosted flakes but from what I can tell new age is just old age rediscovered. I had to give up my tin foil hat in exchange for a necktie.The eclectic approach is all incorporating and flexible to the present situation. It is interesting that those who attempt to use this system in spirituality are usually called flaky "new-agers" who cannot commit to an established ideology. In other words, if you have the audacity to come to your own conclusions, you are "guru-deluded, tinfoil-hat-wearing, hippie.
Infinite moment, grants freedom of winter death, allows life to dawn.
Good luck, Jon, with your studies. Graduate school was a very cool time for me, and no doubt you'll be in your element, too. I didn't have a family to take care of at the time, though--You do, right?--so that made it easier for me in many ways. Anyway, one more for the dark side!
Cindy
Cindy
If the path before you is clear, you’re probably on someone else’s. --Jung
Sorry to interrupt Jon, but if you can make a comment with this tone above it proves only that you are not yet aware of a very improtant fact in life. When competent philosophers are out of work and their abilities are not utilised/rewarded the glitch is in the system that fails to utilise a resourse and not in the resourse it self'. Systems having this glitch fail inevitably. The reason why you don't see many philosophers banging on doors and announcing this fact is not due to the modesty of philosophers but rather to their inclination to avoid rewarding the unfit. If you don't believe me, ask any Buddhist community WHY the person giving the alms is the one who thanks the monk that receives the alms. If they can not explain this to you satisfactorily, you have something fundamentally important to learn.jonsjourney wrote:For sure, Cindy...note the lack of Skinner/Watson on the list! My hope is to get an opportunity to go somewhere (leaving all geographical options open, except Texas ) where I can continue to foster my INFJ influenced intuition and decent counseling skills (or perhaps teach), informed by my by enthusiasm for "Eastern" philosophical mind/body insights. Sounds cool huh? I may well find myself in the unemployment line with all the out of work philosophers...paying off my student loans may be a, ahem, challenge.Are you planning to go to graduate school? If so, a look at your list says a lot about which path will most likely suit you best--art or science. -Cindy
Learning is for its own sake, not for anything else. I was under the impression that you already knew that and practiced it too..
....................
Cindy, I agree that sometimes some things just can't be fixed but it is only because in these cases there is not much to 'look up to'. Theoretically, there is always a transcending level of view and although religions are tend to be more rigid than eclectic approaches to reality, it is precisely because religions provide something particular- as opposed to recommending nothing in particular - that they serve better for sorting out troublesome human psyches. No?
'A fish popped out of the water only to be recaptured again. It is as I, a slave to all yet free of everything.'
http://evinnra-evinnra.blogspot.com
http://evinnra-evinnra.blogspot.com
-
- Associate
- Posts: 3191
- Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2008 3:24 pm
- Location: Earth
Actually, I have no specific ties holding me down in terms of my educational opportunities. No kids...which really helps. But I am pretty close with my family and, while I have already lived in another geographic location, being away from them is difficult...especially as my parents age. The bottom line...I am open to all Grad school options.I didn't have a family to take care of at the time, though--You do, right?--so that made it easier for me in many ways. -Cindy
I found out yesterday that it is looking very good for me to get into a highly competitive undergrad lab assistant position in one of the most active and published labs in the Clinical Psychology program at Kent State....what do they study? Mindfulness, Acceptance, Major Depressive Disorder, Emotional regulation and Generalized Anxiety Disorder. I am just busting right now.
I should have added the last line (when I posted) to that comment that I had intended to add, which was a comical quip from Mel Brook's History of the World film...a sequence with him and Bea Arthur about out of work philosophers being BS artists. Very funny stuff. I was actually just trying to bring a bit of humor to a pretty serious thread so far. Probably just a failure on my part to be clear that I was ending with some humor.Sorry to interrupt Jon, but if you can make a comment with this tone above it proves only that you are not yet aware of a very improtant fact in life. -Evinnra
I also would like to say that I agree that learning for its own sake is, at least for me, an imperative in life. My mind desires information and interesting ponderings. I do not see my education as a means to an end, but rather as a step in a life-long process of actualization. My experience at school has been one amazing, and unexpected, event after another. While I do maintain good discipline and focused direction in terms of my coursework, my overall direction is open and undetermined...just like my life.
Finally...just to be clear...I am quite unaware of a great many "facts of life" and perfectly comfortable with this. Peace!
"He was a dreamer, a thinker, a speculative philosopher... or, as his wife would have it, an idiot." -Douglas Adams
From my perspective, Evinnra, it depends on the person. If religion best suits his needs, that's where he should turn.Evinnra wrote:Cindy, I agree that sometimes some things just can't be fixed but it is only because in these cases there is not much to 'look up to'. Theoretically, there is always a transcending level of view and although religions are tend to be more rigid than eclectic approaches to reality, it is precisely because religions provide something particular- as opposed to recommending nothing in particular - that they serve better for sorting out troublesome human psyches. No?
Cindy
Last edited by Cindy B. on Tue Oct 06, 2009 11:58 am, edited 1 time in total.
If the path before you is clear, you’re probably on someone else’s. --Jung
Good news for you indeed, Jon. Please let us know how it goes. In the meantime, I'll keep my fingers crossed for you...on the off-chance that this sort of thing really works.jonsjourney wrote:I found out yesterday that it is looking very good for me to get into a highly competitive undergrad lab assistant position in one of the most active and published labs in the Clinical Psychology program at Kent State....what do they study? Mindfulness, Acceptance, Major Depressive Disorder, Emotional regulation and Generalized Anxiety Disorder. I am just busting right now.
Cindy
If the path before you is clear, you’re probably on someone else’s. --Jung
Well, sorry for making the assumption that you - just like my self - are not feeling comfortable with those facts of life that still escape you. I was projecting my own state of mind onto you. Perhaps not being comfortable with things that allude our understanding is a hallmark of a philocopher and in fact not everybody is inclined to become a philosopher. Peace.jonsjourney wrote:
Finally...just to be clear...I am quite unaware of a great many "facts of life" and perfectly comfortable with this. Peace!
'A fish popped out of the water only to be recaptured again. It is as I, a slave to all yet free of everything.'
http://evinnra-evinnra.blogspot.com
http://evinnra-evinnra.blogspot.com
-
- Associate
- Posts: 3191
- Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2008 3:24 pm
- Location: Earth
Its all good. I could not imagine not having questions, which lead me to exploring various ideas, etc., often without any real sense of resolution. And I sure hope that is not interpreted as a value judgment as to whether one way is better than the other. We all need different things, right? Otherwise, we would not have much to talk about!Well, sorry for making the assumption that you - just like my self - are not feeling comfortable with those facts of life that still escape you. -Evinnra
"He was a dreamer, a thinker, a speculative philosopher... or, as his wife would have it, an idiot." -Douglas Adams
You drive me nuts! Please don't get me started about values, learning and resolutions, Jon. Chill bro!jonsjourney wrote:Its all good. I could not imagine not having questions, which lead me to exploring various ideas, etc., often without any real sense of resolution. And I sure hope that is not interpreted as a value judgment as to whether one way is better than the other. We all need different things, right? Otherwise, we would not have much to talk about!Well, sorry for making the assumption that you - just like my self - are not feeling comfortable with those facts of life that still escape you. -Evinnra
'A fish popped out of the water only to be recaptured again. It is as I, a slave to all yet free of everything.'
http://evinnra-evinnra.blogspot.com
http://evinnra-evinnra.blogspot.com
-
- Associate
- Posts: 266
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 6:01 pm
- Location: Northern California
Hi folks... Noman invited me to this thread last October, but as student and mom (going for a B.A. in psychology, w/ a minor in religious studies, will be done by the end of this year, am dreaming of grad school but not sure if its demands would be compatible w/ also being a primary caretaker to two girls, at that point ages 3 and 5), it has taken me a good four months to find the time to at least look at it.
On to the actual topic at hand (in about 20 minutes, before I have to dash off to the next class):
I wonder, Noman, if your poll would be more helpful, if you'd specify that you seem to be asking not about the overall field of psychology (in which you seem to be lumping as diverse traditions as the make-shift shamanism/philosophy of Freud or Jung, the reductionist materialism of Skinner and Watson, the humanist approaches of Rogers or Maslow, the practical works of the many people out in the field, and the scores of new-agey mail order credentialed self-help book industry writers) but about the specific area of Counseling Psychology, which is merely a small subsection of the entire field.
Unfortunately, I know much more about research than I know about counseling. My passion is about finding out which of our common beliefs that ring so true to the untrained ear we find confirmed when examining them with mindfully and wisely collected data, utilizing intelligent and creative study designs and rigorous methodology, and which of them turn out to be benign or malignant myths that comfort, confuse, or hurt people.
Many of those you won't find in your general interest newspaper or magazine, since many so-called "science" journalists are notorious for picking, choosing, sensationalizing, and/or misinterpreting what they report. When you take the effort to look through peer-reviewed publications, you not only get the reported results but also the way data are being collected and the statistical methods utilized to evaluate what has been found. Only then, you can truly make sense of the information. Yes, some prayer study might sound cool, but if the sample sizes are marginally small or the researchers administering it fail to control for friends and family also praying for their control groups, the results are pretty much meaningless. I don't mean to pick on prayer studies in particular; it's simply what came to my mind as an example.
People like Cindy, who work in counseling psychology, benefit from academic researchers sorting through claims and working hard on separating the wheat from the chaff. Some claims are harder to test than others. Statistics is a game of large numbers and averages. Humanist approaches and other attempts at individualizing care stubbornly resist being looked at in this way. To me that doesn't mean they are necessarily wrong, but that we need to have a particularly cautious look when somebody claims their approach cannot be examined with scientific methods. Some of those folks might have something extremely valuable to share with the world. Others could be simply selling a newly packaged kind of snake oil.
Snake oil itself might be a valid type of Shamanic enterprise, but I simply don't like people who pretend to be something or somebody they are not. I stubbornly believe that one can be a Shaman without pretending to be scientist (and weakening the collective mind by preying on people's gullibility). I trust that this world has usage for honest Shamans, I really do.
Neither of these two types of Shamans (the honest and the dishonest type) are truly psychologists in the way I understand the term. Which doesn't mean research psychologists should be forbidden to examine Shamanism as a phenomenon and which also doesn't mean counseling psychologists can't use Shamanism (ideally consciously, not by accident as Freud did when treating his cases of female "hysteria"). But it's not psychology, I feel, until it's been rigorously and empirically tested.
Darn, the twenty minutes are over, so I gotta run. But I'll try to get back to this thread whenever I have another short lull in my duties to see what became of it... I feel I barely scratched the surface...
As usual, sorry for anybody I might have offended by accident.
I love you, I really do.
Julia
Actually I heard this one answered as "only one, but the lightbulb really and honestly needs to want change"...To end this post on a more cheerful note, how many philosophers does it take to change a lightbulb? Question What lightbulb and please define 'change' first!
To me that sounds like a philosophical statement.Now in my case, I always say I’ve “come to the conclusion” of “god”. So is that a spiritual statement or psychological statement? Or does that depend on the definition of “god”?
To me (lay-ordained in Soto-Zen Buddhism and avid believer in the value of meditative practice) Buddha was a scientist. His frequent admonitions to students to make sure they don't accept anything at face value that he or other leaders told them sound to me like a great and passionate elevator pitch for empiricism.JonsJourney, (whose opinion Cindy is not responsible for), claimed that Buddha was a psychologist.
I have met serious eclecticists, who hold themselves to high standards of thinking and methodology, and then I've met flaky folks who think they already have all the answers. I hope I'm the former, but on my bad days, I can be pretty flaky and dogmatic, too. That's what I love about venues such as this one: If used wisely, it can keep us honest and humble. If misused, like any tool can be, it of course simply polishes and hardens our ego-illusions, so caution is always in order.The eclectic approach is all incorporating and flexible to the present situation. It is interesting that those who attempt to use this system in spirituality are usually called flaky "new-agers" who cannot commit to an established ideology. In other words, if you have the audacity to come to your own conclusions, you are "guru-deluded, tinfoil-hat-wearing, hippie.
On to the actual topic at hand (in about 20 minutes, before I have to dash off to the next class):
I wonder, Noman, if your poll would be more helpful, if you'd specify that you seem to be asking not about the overall field of psychology (in which you seem to be lumping as diverse traditions as the make-shift shamanism/philosophy of Freud or Jung, the reductionist materialism of Skinner and Watson, the humanist approaches of Rogers or Maslow, the practical works of the many people out in the field, and the scores of new-agey mail order credentialed self-help book industry writers) but about the specific area of Counseling Psychology, which is merely a small subsection of the entire field.
Unfortunately, I know much more about research than I know about counseling. My passion is about finding out which of our common beliefs that ring so true to the untrained ear we find confirmed when examining them with mindfully and wisely collected data, utilizing intelligent and creative study designs and rigorous methodology, and which of them turn out to be benign or malignant myths that comfort, confuse, or hurt people.
Many of those you won't find in your general interest newspaper or magazine, since many so-called "science" journalists are notorious for picking, choosing, sensationalizing, and/or misinterpreting what they report. When you take the effort to look through peer-reviewed publications, you not only get the reported results but also the way data are being collected and the statistical methods utilized to evaluate what has been found. Only then, you can truly make sense of the information. Yes, some prayer study might sound cool, but if the sample sizes are marginally small or the researchers administering it fail to control for friends and family also praying for their control groups, the results are pretty much meaningless. I don't mean to pick on prayer studies in particular; it's simply what came to my mind as an example.
People like Cindy, who work in counseling psychology, benefit from academic researchers sorting through claims and working hard on separating the wheat from the chaff. Some claims are harder to test than others. Statistics is a game of large numbers and averages. Humanist approaches and other attempts at individualizing care stubbornly resist being looked at in this way. To me that doesn't mean they are necessarily wrong, but that we need to have a particularly cautious look when somebody claims their approach cannot be examined with scientific methods. Some of those folks might have something extremely valuable to share with the world. Others could be simply selling a newly packaged kind of snake oil.
Snake oil itself might be a valid type of Shamanic enterprise, but I simply don't like people who pretend to be something or somebody they are not. I stubbornly believe that one can be a Shaman without pretending to be scientist (and weakening the collective mind by preying on people's gullibility). I trust that this world has usage for honest Shamans, I really do.
Neither of these two types of Shamans (the honest and the dishonest type) are truly psychologists in the way I understand the term. Which doesn't mean research psychologists should be forbidden to examine Shamanism as a phenomenon and which also doesn't mean counseling psychologists can't use Shamanism (ideally consciously, not by accident as Freud did when treating his cases of female "hysteria"). But it's not psychology, I feel, until it's been rigorously and empirically tested.
Darn, the twenty minutes are over, so I gotta run. But I'll try to get back to this thread whenever I have another short lull in my duties to see what became of it... I feel I barely scratched the surface...
As usual, sorry for anybody I might have offended by accident.
I love you, I really do.
Julia