Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
ScRoTo TuRbOtUrD
Jan 21, 2007



Caesar Saladin posted:

i agree, these forums are the worst

Does the desktop version of the forum have the digg button? Because that button is mighty wicked

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Another Bill
Sep 27, 2018

I wish I had a son to kick me in the nuts.





I know a real honest to goodness psychiatrist socially and i asked him once drunk if he was Jungian or Freudian leaning.

He laughed in my face, told me no one in psychiatry believes that poo poo anymore and 95% of his job is monthly check ins with people to monitor or adjust the dose of something a family doctor prescribed them.

Jorp is an idiot

OMFG FURRY
Jul 10, 2006

[snarky comment]



his older lectures are good as long as you can avoid the political tangents

hes real big on terror management theory tho so be careful


e: uigh thats what i get for firing blind

Grevling
Dec 18, 2016



I sat next to a guy who was reading 12 Rules For Life on a plane recently. He looked nerdy and in his late 20's, had a wispy moustache, wore a khaki colored suit and a wristwatch and mostly sat hunched down looking at Discord on his phone.

I had brought a book by Zizek so I took it out and started reading hoping he'd notice. I was also pretty badly dressed, hadn't had a haircut and shave in a while so which I thought was funny.

Near the end of the flight I ended up just pointing it out to him and asking if he'd noticed, he had and then we had a short conversation. He hadn't watched the debate but he'd heard of Zizek. He thought Peterson was a very interesting and complex thinker. I didn't challenge him or anything as I didn't see the point. I've also met other people who like him. That's my JP story.

Blurry Gray Thing
Jun 3, 2009


Cubone posted:

dude carl jung is like the nikola tesla of psychiatry

Jung is to psychology and psychiatry what alchemy is to chemistry.

Yeah, there's some merit there. Yeah, some modern ideas grew out of it. Yeah, it's got cultural value and historic value. But loving lol at anyone who still practices that mystical bullcrap to try and achieve useful results.

Poohs Packin
Jan 13, 2019

My god, Winston, is that infernal sun still giving my buttocks that entirely too cool smirk?!


GRECOROMANGRABASS posted:

I was sidelined by Jordan Peterson becoming a goon household name. It turns out that as he became more well known, he started to puppet some alt right talking points. Which was really sad to discover.

I had previously listened to a fair amount of his older youtube classroom footage, where he presented some sound ideas. Fundamental concepts like like orienting yourself towards those that have characteristics that you admire, and learning to understand what it is about those characteristics that appeal to you. He had lots of good material on self actualization. He also wasn't afraid to guide you into topics that weren't easy to approach. He spent a lot of time parsing the work of Carl Yung -- which Peterson cautioned against taking lightly, as getting to know and recognize the parts of your self which you typically hide or deny existing is something that CAN help you move forward and grow as a person, but it can also break your self image if you're not experienced and prepared, or move too quickly. But it was the depth and risk of his work that made him stand out to me. Usually a self help book seller just offers platitudes and wouldn't risk exposing the reader to anything as advanced as Yung.

(granted, I think these lectures were for graduate level psychology students, not your average person seeking help on youtube, but it was helpful for me.)

I know SA hates the guy, but his older material was really the sort of thing you had to pay a lot of money to have access to via university. He put it all online for free, which is cool.


Nah they teach you about Carl Jung in Intro to Psychology (Source: I studied psychology). He made some contributions to psychoanalysis but also had some really really wild ideas as well. Much of his stuff has been built upon, but hes no more "dangerous" than Bohr or Darwin.

His ideas on collective unconscious are really interesting and often misinterpreted. Im glad you found value in learning about Jung but you dont need a mentally-ill misogynist to parse it for you. There has been a lot written about Jung, and you don't need Peterson to access it.

Caesar Saladin
Aug 15, 2004



My brother dismissed the idea of cleaning his apartment as some "pathetic self help Jordan Peterson poo poo" which i thought was really funny. Like bro he didn't invent the concept of making the bed.

Poohs Packin
Jan 13, 2019

My god, Winston, is that infernal sun still giving my buttocks that entirely too cool smirk?!


Caesar Saladin posted:

My brother dismissed the idea of cleaning his apartment as some "pathetic self help Jordan Peterson poo poo" which i thought was really funny. Like bro he didn't invent the concept of making the bed.

everyone itt needs to put up a picture of their loving PRISTINE posting station before talking any more poo poo about J.P.

Grevling
Dec 18, 2016



It's fascist for me to clean my room actually, haven't you heard of Jordan Peterson?

feelix
Nov 27, 2016



Cubone posted:

I mean weird goons turn him into a cult figure for not being his slightly more famous mentor, thank you for demonstrating, and it's weird to refer to the second most famous and studied psychiatrist in history as somehing "advanced" that it's remarkable to "risk exposing" students to

So you're a Freud fan so you can be an anti-nonconformist?

Klyith
Aug 3, 2007

GBS Pledge Week


feelix posted:

So you're a Freud fan so you can be an anti-nonconformist?

I'm a Freud fan because I'm having sex with your mother

feelix
Nov 27, 2016



Klyith posted:

I'm a Freud fan because I'm having sex with your mother

Given the subject matter I'm just happy I'm not banging my own mom

ScRoTo TuRbOtUrD
Jan 21, 2007



Klyith posted:

I'm a Freud fan because I'm having sex with your mother

Best post itt

Grevling
Dec 18, 2016



Modern psychology is even more bullshit than Freud and Jung.

feelix
Nov 27, 2016



Grevling posted:

Modern psychology is even more bullshit than Freud and Jung.
It's always going to be bullshit because it's an inherently untestable "science" (experimental branches of psychology excluded, obviously)

Poohs Packin
Jan 13, 2019

My god, Winston, is that infernal sun still giving my buttocks that entirely too cool smirk?!


Grevling posted:

Modern psychology is even more bullshit than Freud and Jung.

*crosses legs and sits up in chair*

Would you care to expand on that? Why do you think its bullshit?

Caesar Saladin
Aug 15, 2004



if its bullshit then why are psychologists so helpful and meaningful to so many people, ranging from trauma victims to the mentally ill to just sadbrained people

ScRoTo TuRbOtUrD
Jan 21, 2007



Caesar Saladin posted:

if its bullshit then why are psychologists so helpful and meaningful to so many people, ranging from trauma victims to the mentally ill to just sadbrained people

Same question but instead of psychologists its heroin

Poohs Packin
Jan 13, 2019

My god, Winston, is that infernal sun still giving my buttocks that entirely too cool smirk?!


feelix
Nov 27, 2016



Caesar Saladin posted:

if its bullshit then why are psychologists so helpful and meaningful to so many people, ranging from trauma victims to the mentally ill to just sadbrained people

The effectiveness of an intervention is not proof of the proposed mechanisms behind said intervention. That's not how science works.

Poohs Packin
Jan 13, 2019

My god, Winston, is that infernal sun still giving my buttocks that entirely too cool smirk?!


feelix posted:

The effectiveness of an intervention is not proof of the proposed mechanisms behind said intervention. That's not how science works.

Yeah but calling modern psychology "bullshit" could discourage people from seeking therapy which is something we should not do. There are tons of peer-reviewed studies showing the effectiveness of psychotherapy on treatment of major depression and a slew of other ailments.

Grevling
Dec 18, 2016



The_Continental posted:

Yeah but calling modern psychology "bullshit" could discourage people from seeking therapy which is something we should not do. There are tons of peer-reviewed studies showing the effectiveness of psychotherapy on treatment of major depression and a slew of other ailments.

Instead of that there are people who will help you for free, they're called priests and imams.

feelix
Nov 27, 2016



Grevling posted:

Instead of that there are people who will help you for free, they're called priests and sometimes imams.

wtf

feelix
Nov 27, 2016



The_Continental posted:

Yeah but calling modern psychology "bullshit" could discourage people from seeking therapy which is something we should not do. There are tons of peer-reviewed studies showing the effectiveness of psychotherapy on treatment of major depression and a slew of other ailments.

Not my intention at all, therapy is very good

Cubone
May 26, 2011

Because it never leaves its bedroom, no one has ever seen this poster's real face.

DickParasite posted:

I still don't know how you feel about Jung or Tesla

feelix posted:

So you're a Freud fan so you can be an anti-nonconformist?
I don't know why either of you think that I was sharing an opinion about any of them
but if it'll satisfy your curiosity: gently caress edison, kill freud, and marry my father

Hardon Crime
Jan 15, 2020

hubba hubba hubba hubba


OMFG FURRY posted:



his older lectures are good as long as you can avoid the political tangents

hes real big on terror management theory tho so be careful


e: uigh thats what i get for firing blind

"jordan peterson is good, actually"

Poohs Packin
Jan 13, 2019

My god, Winston, is that infernal sun still giving my buttocks that entirely too cool smirk?!


Was he always this much of a bible thumper?

mind the walrus
Sep 22, 2006



feelix posted:

Not my intention at all, therapy is very good
That's the tricky needle to thread because a lot of therapist and modern psychology does deserve scrutiny and to be called out for being a lot more primitive and scam-oriented than people in the field are willing to admit to... but the field is still a net good and is sufficiently advanced to actually help people with emotional trauma and/or anyone willing to put the work in, even if it's not a panacea.

Peterson is the rare bird who is "Oops all scam" and should be ostracized and mocked at every possible turn.

Grevling posted:

Instead of that there are people who will help you for free, they're called priests and imams.
They want communal backing in exchange for their help, whether it be membership in their organization, donation, community outreach, or just plain-old giving them a good reputation. The super-nice ones won't outright say it and the super-lovely ones will just pump you for money/membership but all of them play by a social contract whereby the means of helping you are inextricably linked to doing favors for the tribe they represent. This is also why you can't just go to a Priest or Imam, plonk down on their sofa, and use them as a sounding board for your neurosis on the regular. You want that kind-of emotional prostitution? You pay direct to a therapist who will offer the same type of guidance but without the pretense that there's anything but cold, hard cash between you two.

Hardon Crime
Jan 15, 2020

hubba hubba hubba hubba


The_Continental posted:

Was he always this much of a bible thumper?

thats just kind of the arc of the conservative movement. growing up, my father was an Ayn Rand objectivist who taught me to be atheist, around ~2014 he decided he wanted to learn Hebrew and convert to Judaism, and about a year and a half ago he wants to go to Catholic mass and is now identifying as a Christian

frogge
Apr 7, 2006




Maps of Meaning goes into some frankly weird esoteric Christian symbolism stuff so I would say so. I read it in the mid-2000s and thought he was a hack back then. I think it was written around the turn of the millenium, so yeah I think he's always been a God botherer.

Moon Atari
Dec 26, 2010



Another Bill posted:

I know a real honest to goodness psychiatrist socially and i asked him once drunk if he was Jungian or Freudian leaning.

He laughed in my face, told me no one in psychiatry believes that poo poo anymore and 95% of his job is monthly check ins with people to monitor or adjust the dose of something a family doctor prescribed them.

Jorp is an idiot

They definitely have zero place in psychiatry since that evolved into the purely medical/biological tract. Modern psychiatrists have zero interest in hearing you talk beyond you describing your symptoms. They are a specialization of pharmacological medicine.

They also have close to zero place in psychology beyond knowledge of the history and development of the field. Except there is part of the public that likes them and a little niche of psychologists who get into it and have fought for the right to maintain registration while practicing psychoanalysis (but are only allowed to do so for subclinical general life problem stuff). This is something the modern psychologists can allow with the justification that patients who believe in it strongly are unlikely to respond to anything else. They sure as hell can't receive government funding for it though (explanatory note for Americans: some countries subsidize or fully fund even subclinical psychologist appointments).

In order to avoid dogmatism some psych departments are motivated to maintain a small segment of kooks, either psychodynamic stuff or more postmodern anti-scientific method theories that mainstream psychology wasn't quick enough to recognize as an invasive weed before they ran rampant through the garden ('feminist psychology' being a good example). Generally they are presented with some disclaimers though.

You are overwhelmingly more likely to find acolytes of Freud and Jung in the philosophy department. Philosophers love their historical texts and ruling over domains of dead superceded knowledge, not to mention rejecting knowledge obtained through the scientific method rather than contemplation.
If you want to have any respect for philosophy professors I recommend keeping it in first year rather than taking a philosophy department unit called "philosophy of psychology" at the end of a bachelor of science double majoring in psychology and largely focused on neuro-cognitive models and advanced psychometrics and statistics.

mind the walrus
Sep 22, 2006



Kind of dying to hear your thoughts on the proliferate, enduring, endless popularity of "introvert/extrovert."

Hardon Crime
Jan 15, 2020

hubba hubba hubba hubba


the left needs a new intifada and a new international

some individuals (as represented by Trump) have managed to create a Nationalist international

what i'm worried about is a Global Gladio

Moon Atari
Dec 26, 2010



mind the walrus posted:

Kind of dying to hear your thoughts on the proliferate, enduring, endless popularity of "introvert/extrovert."

All models of personality are misused and misunderstood by the general public, significantly reducing their credibility unless you get into their academic meaning. Introversion/extroversion has some value, and significant amounts of evidence that it is an enduring and stable personality trait, as part of both Big Five and HEXICO.

There are two problems I have with it though. The first is that it conflates things that should be seperate constructs. Tolerance/desire for social interaction should be better differentiated from anxiety of or lack of ability to socially interact. Extreme manifestations of that difference would be someone who is extremely charismatic/popular and has zero problems in the moment when they do interact with others– but who doesn't really enjoy it so intentionally self isolates; versus someone with a desire to interact more but who has been forced into accepting a loner's lifestyle by other problems (possibly to the point of easing their behaviour to cognition dissonance by convincing themselves they like it that way).

Second is that I think (but can't prove with what is available) that it is more context specific than other factors in any of the popular personality models, and that better questions need to be designed and tested to account for this. Both my first problem and second are somewhat overcome and accounted for–but only in the far more advanced proprietary personality assessments rather than the weak-rear end academic ones. I favour Saville's Wave Personality and Professional Styles, which I believe still outperforms all other personality assessments on basically every validity measure. Hogan's Personality Inventory is also good in terms of having an insane amount of data to back it, but it is kind of outdated compared to Saville's.

Problem with that is that I'm barely allowed to even share the vague details of those models to anyone who isn't paying a lot of money for it. More importantly: that their output is several pages long and requires a professional to interpret and explain to the individual how all its various factors interact with one another to make a complex individual personality not reducible to a couple of different easily digested horoscope style labels. People don't like that. The general public can't have MBTI style chats about that and arguments over who has it better or worse.

Hardon Crime
Jan 15, 2020

hubba hubba hubba hubba


Moon Atari posted:

All models of personality are misused and misunderstood by the general public, significantly reducing their credibility unless you get into their academic meaning. Introversion/extroversion has some value, and significant amounts of evidence that it is an enduring and stable personality trait, as part of both Big Five and HEXICO.

There are two problems I have with it though. The first is that it conflates things that should be seperate constructs. Tolerance/desire for social interaction should be better differentiated from anxiety of or lack of ability to socially interact. Extreme manifestations of that difference would be someone who is extremely charismatic/popular and has zero problems in the moment when they do interact with others– but who doesn't really enjoy it so intentionally self isolates; versus someone with a desire to interact more but who has been forced into accepting a loner's lifestyle by other problems (possibly to the point of easing their behaviour to cognition dissonance by convincing themselves they like it that way).

Second is that I think (but can't prove with what is available) that it is more context specific than other factors in any of the popular personality models, and that better questions need to be designed and tested to account for this. Both my first problem and second are somewhat overcome and accounted for–but only in the far more advanced proprietary personality assessments rather than the weak-rear end academic ones. I favour Saville's Wave Personality and Professional Styles, which I believe still outperforms all other personality assessments on basically every validity measure. Hogan's Personality Inventory is also good in terms of having an insane amount of data to back it, but it is kind of outdated compared to Saville's.

Problem with that is that I'm barely allowed to even share the vague details of those models to anyone who isn't paying a lot of money for it. More importantly: that their output is several pages long and requires a professional to interpret and explain to the individual how all its various factors interact with one another to make a complex individual personality not reducible to a couple of different easily digested horoscope style labels. People don't like that. The general public can't have MBTI style chats about that and arguments over who has it better or worse.

that showed them

Ghost Leviathan
Mar 2, 2017
Probation
Can't post for 29 hours!


I don't need therapy, I need to be hosed in public by fourteen horny werewolves

Galewolf
Jan 9, 2007






End of Shoelace posted:

Also, he debated ultra-Marxist Slavoj Zizek about capitalism and communism, and he prepared by reading the Communist Manifesto lmao

This was from the first page but Zizek vs Peterson advertised with this WWE Smackdown levels of hype with, uh, 200 USD tickets to see and basically the most wet fart thing ever with Peterson clearly not even on the same area code with Zizek when it comes to knowledge and overall debate skills. I think it was the beginning of his fall, being faced with the reality and getting curbstomped by an angry Slovakian badger live.

AlphaKeny1
Feb 17, 2006



zizek is extremely cool and good

peterson bad and dumb

peterson gets more popularity because he's easier to understand for chuds

mind the walrus
Sep 22, 2006



Thank you for this interesting and well-informed response. Speaking solely as a layman I have found both issues you describe which is why I wished to know more. The concept of reducing personality down to a binary where untold legions of internet randos call themselves "introverts" in the desperate attempt to explain why they don't fit in, or have friends, or have a girlfriend, seems like an active obstruction to growth. It's understandable, and a little regrettable, that better models are both too byzantine and gated for average people to understand. If it weren't the introvert/extrovert dichotomy, it would be something else. Thank you, for helping elucidate.

Galewolf posted:

This was from the first page but Zizek vs Peterson advertised with this WWE Smackdown levels of hype with, uh, 200 USD tickets to see and basically the most wet fart thing ever with Peterson clearly not even on the same area code with Zizek when it comes to knowledge and overall debate skills. I think it was the beginning of his fall, being faced with the reality and getting curbstomped by an angry Slovakian badger live.
I'm amazed anyone was fooled by Peterson, like ever. All he ever seemed to me was angry in a very flaccid way that suggested performative masculinity.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Poohs Packin
Jan 13, 2019

My god, Winston, is that infernal sun still giving my buttocks that entirely too cool smirk?!


My armchair psychoanalysis is that he was a typically disenchanted man trapped in the malaise of academic obscurity who found a niche saying things designed to perk the ears of certain types of right wing boys. He's succeeded and has had to double down on his personal brand, which has brought him further attention and supercharged his imposter syndrome, which is already fairly common in academics of his stripe. He receives confirmation of his imposter syndrome when placed in front of guys like Zizek, of whom he never deserved to share a dais in the first place. He can't back down because he's receiving constant reinforcement from his increasingly puerile fanbase, that he generally despises. All of this culminates in acute anxiety which he now has to treat with Benzos.

Poohs Packin fucked around with this message at 08:24 on Oct 20, 2020

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply