Via Wiki knowit all Pedia.com

Because SOMEONE wanted to be Obtuse about it...

" The Oedipus complex, in psychoanalytic theory, is a group of largely unconscious (dynamically repressed) ideas and feelings which concentrate on the desire to possess the parent of the opposite sex and eliminate the parent of the same sex.[1][2] According to classical psychoanalytic theory, the complex appears during the so-called "oedipal phase" of libidinal and ego development; i.e. between the ages of three and five years, though oedipal manifestation may be detected earlier.[3][4]

The complex is named after Greek mythical character Oedipus, who (albeit unknowingly) kills his father, Laius and marries his mother, Jocasta. According to Sigmund Freud, the Oedipus complex is a common phenomenon, built in phylogenetically, and is responsible for much unconscious guilt. The Oedipus complex, as Freud put it:
“ His destiny moves us only because it might have been ours – because the oracle laid the same curse upon us before our birth as upon him. It is the fate of all of us, perhaps, to direct our first sexual impulse towards our mother and our first hatred and our first murderous wish against our father. Our dreams convince us that this is so.[5] ”

Classical theory considers the successful resolution of the Oedipus complex to be developmentally desirable, the key to the development of sexual roles and identity. Freud posited that boys and girls resolved the conflicts differently as a result of the male's castration anxiety (caused by oedipal rivalry with the father) and the female's penis envy. He also held that the unsuccessful resolution of the Oedipus complex could result in neurosis, paedophilia, and homosexuality.

Classical theory holds that "resolution" of the Oedipus complex takes place through identification with the parent of the same sex and (partial) temporary renunciation of the parent of the opposite sex; the opposite-sex parent is then "rediscovered" as the growing person's adult sexual object.

In classical theory, people who are fixated at the oedipal level are "mother-fixated" or "father-fixated", and reveal this by choosing sexual partners who are discernible surrogates for their parent(s)."

>> ^volumptuous:

Ubuntu?
Yeah, I'll just do that. Because you know, I don't need things like Adobe CS4/5, Logic Audio, Pro Tools, Ableton Live, Max/MSP, Final Cut, Color, Motion, Lightroom and basically every other piece of software I use for my professional and fun purposes.
After scanning around some Ubuntu forums and finding out just what a nightmare it is to run any of my required software, I called a friend @ JPL, and one at Oracle to ask if my summation was correct, and they said "for what you need, Ubuntu makes zero sense". Yep, there you go campion.
Why are we talking about Ubuntu? Oh right, to show that we don't need sweatshops to live our wetern lifestyles. Which for me, (aside from about 1/2 the tech I own) is absolutely true.
I work from home, my GF takes mass transit. We have a massive garden where we get most of our food from. We buy all other food from locally grown, sustainable sources (mostly south central farmers market). We make all of our own cleaning agents, use soap nuts for washing clothes, recycle all water, harvest rainwater, solar dry food, hardly ever use a heater, have no A/C or central air. We use canvas bags to shop with, compost 100% of all food waste, recycle or reuse all plastic/paper/glass etc. Our combined trash for a full month is 1/2 of a normal small plastic bag.
I DO NOT buy Nike products, have never bought anything from WalMart, don't buy fastfood (aside from the ocassional In-n-Out) and we both study the source where all of our merch is made. In this ugly web of global corporate confusion, it's not always easy to find out where every piece of every camera or MIDI controller or PS3 you buy comes from.
It is very easy to "vote with my wallet" although I am not so naive to think it makes a dent on the big picture. But a lot of people would rather just scream "just buy Ubuntu and the world is saved" that's a load of bullshit.


Ubuntu. If you need it, write it. That's how Linux works.

I know I could google, and I will, but what are your tips for making your own cleaning products as I'm quite interested in doing that.

In reply to this comment by volumptuous:
Ubuntu?

Yeah, I'll just do that. Because you know, I don't need things like Adobe CS4/5, Logic Audio, Pro Tools, Ableton Live, Max/MSP, Final Cut, Color, Motion, Lightroom and basically every other piece of software I use for my professional and fun purposes.

After scanning around some Ubuntu forums and finding out just what a nightmare it is to run any of my required software, I called a friend @ JPL, and one at Oracle to ask if my summation was correct, and they said "for what you need, Ubuntu makes zero sense". Yep, there you go campion.

Why are we talking about Ubuntu? Oh right, to show that we don't need sweatshops to live our wetern lifestyles. Which for me, (aside from about 1/2 the tech I own) is absolutely true.

I work from home, my GF takes mass transit. We have a massive garden where we get most of our food from. We buy all other food from locally grown, sustainable sources (mostly south central farmers market). We make all of our own cleaning agents, use soap nuts for washing clothes, recycle all water, harvest rainwater, solar dry food, hardly ever use a heater, have no A/C or central air. We use canvas bags to shop with, compost 100% of all food waste, recycle or reuse all plastic/paper/glass etc. Our combined trash for a full month is 1/2 of a normal small plastic bag.

I DO NOT buy Nike products, have never bought anything from WalMart, don't buy fastfood (aside from the ocassional In-n-Out) and we both study the source where all of our merch is made. In this ugly web of global corporate confusion, it's not always easy to find out where every piece of every camera or MIDI controller or PS3 you buy comes from.

It is very easy to "vote with my wallet" although I am not so naive to think it makes a dent on the big picture. But a lot of people would rather just scream "just buy Ubuntu and the world is saved" that's a load of bullshit.

Ubuntu?

Yeah, I'll just do that. Because you know, I don't need things like Adobe CS4/5, Logic Audio, Pro Tools, Ableton Live, Max/MSP, Final Cut, Color, Motion, Lightroom and basically every other piece of software I use for my professional and fun purposes.

After scanning around some Ubuntu forums and finding out just what a nightmare it is to run any of my required software, I called a friend @ JPL, and one at Oracle to ask if my summation was correct, and they said "for what you need, Ubuntu makes zero sense". Yep, there you go campion.

Why are we talking about Ubuntu? Oh right, to show that we don't need sweatshops to live our wetern lifestyles. Which for me, (aside from about 1/2 the tech I own) is absolutely true.

I work from home, my GF takes mass transit. We have a massive garden where we get most of our food from. We buy all other food from locally grown, sustainable sources (mostly south central farmers market). We make all of our own cleaning agents, use soap nuts for washing clothes, recycle all water, harvest rainwater, solar dry food, hardly ever use a heater, have no A/C or central air. We use canvas bags to shop with, compost 100% of all food waste, recycle or reuse all plastic/paper/glass etc. Our combined trash for a full month is 1/2 of a normal small plastic bag.

I DO NOT buy Nike products, have never bought anything from WalMart, don't buy fastfood (aside from the ocassional In-n-Out) and we both study the source where all of our merch is made. In this ugly web of global corporate confusion, it's not always easy to find out where every piece of every camera or MIDI controller or PS3 you buy comes from.

It is very easy to "vote with my wallet" although I am not so naive to think it makes a dent on the big picture. But a lot of people would rather just scream "just buy Ubuntu and the world is saved" that's a load of bullshit.

>> ^dag

"Relying on doctors to hand down their wisdom to us is completely the wrong strategy. Question doctors, suspect doctors - trust them as much as you would your mechanic. Sorry, but I don't see why doctors must be put on to a noble pedestal any more than other professions.
They do lots of great work. So do teachers - so do computer programmers. I get pissed when people bow to their unswerving knowledge. Respect science, get medical advice - but make your own decisions.
"



If you are not caught up on the current research, how are you supposed to make an accurate informed decision regarding your health? That's why people defer to doctors, just like they will to any professional. Allowing the patient to make their own decisions is the cornerstone of any patient doctor relationship, but ignore advice at your own peril. View your doctor as a mechanic only if you value your life as much as you value your car.

"I respect science- but the medical profession has a culture that is distinct and separate to pure science. For one, it's a client based industry that deals directly with people to provide a service- like your mechanic. For another- I don't trust the medical-big pharma culture that is way too self-serving, incestuous and profit driven."



This is where you are completely wrong. First of all, clinical medicine is evidence based. Science is the hand that guides patient care. Many clinicians are also researchers. Secondly, there's been a huge amount of effort to separate medicine from industry. Big pharm are completely forbidden to advertise to medical students, and unlike for pharmacists, "kick-backs" and other perks to influence doctors' prescribing habits are illegal. Any industry ties for researchers must be clearly documented and reported, and conflicts of interests are strictly monitored.


"I was just reading over on Reddit that as of 2002, prescription drug deaths outnumber drug deaths from heroin and cocaine. Who is responsible for pushing that 30th prescription refill of Vicodin®? - why yes- it's those pillars of society - the all knowing oracles of the human body - Doctors.
We definitely can't have people smoking a bit of weed to chill the hell out - but keep coming in for those Valium® refills people. Those new golf clubs aren't cheap."



Lets see just how many things are wrong with this post.

1. Prescription drug deaths outnumber drug deaths

First of all, you even quoted the article wrong. The article says: "as of 2002, prescription drug overdoses have started outnumbering deaths from heroin and cocaine." Obviously overdoses does not equal death. The article does not provide a source for this statistic, and even if this is true, all it means is that prescription drugs are a lot safer than street drugs, considering the number of people on prescription medication far outnumber the hardcore heroin abusers. It also doesn't take into account just how many of those people on prescription medication have serious health issues - a 80 year old with heart failure and multiple co morbidities doesn't have a good prognosis in the first place.



2. Doctors pushing unnecessary Vicodin.

This is incredibly unlikely, since the doctor gets nothing from the drug company in return. In fact, a frustrating portion of any doctor's practice is filtering out drug seeking behaviour. Ask any doctor and they can tell you the ridiculous excuses they've heard.

Also, the article you linked is about celebrities. You can't judge the medical profession based on a small subset based in LA. Seriously, you think Michael Jackson will say "you're right doc, I shouldn't be using all these prescription meds to help me perform" or "Screw you doc. I can find someone else who will give me what I want"?

3. Blaming the medical profession for marijuana laws:

Right, lets ignore the complicated political issues re: America's war on drugs, and blame it on doctors instead. Let's just say that medicinal marijuana is one of the few ways that you CAN smoke pot legally.

It's pretty clear that you are heavily biased in your view of the medical profession. You use phrases like "self-serving, incestuous and profit driven", sarcastically referr to doctors as "oracles" or "pillars of society", and insinuate that doctors would compromise your health for a set of new golf clubs. I don't know what horrible experiences you've had in your past that has made you feel this way, but this is as far from the truth as possible.

Your distrust of the profession is bathed in ignorance, and your blind accusations, including your previous rant against obstetricians, is incredibly condescending and insulting.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

Relying on doctors to hand down their wisdom to us is completely the wrong strategy. Question doctors, suspect doctors - trust them as much as you would your mechanic. Sorry, but I don't see why doctors must be put on to a noble pedestal any more than other professions.

They do lots of great work. So do teachers - so do computer programmers. I get pissed when people bow to their unswerving knowledge. Respect science, get medical advice - but make your own decisions.

I respect science- but the medical profession has a culture that is distinct and separate to pure science. For one, it's a client based industry that deals directly with people to provide a service- like your mechanic. For another- I don't trust the medical-big pharma culture that is way too self-serving, incestuous and profit driven.

I was just reading over on Reddit that as of 2002, prescription drug deaths outnumber drug deaths from heroin and cocaine. Who is responsible for pushing that 30th prescription refill of Vicodin®? - why yes- it's those pillars of society - the all knowing oracles of the human body - Doctors.

We definitely can't have people smoking a bit of weed to chill the hell out - but keep coming in for those Valium® refills people. Those new golf clubs aren't cheap.

sorry for the rant

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

More ways to pass time and divert ourselves for sure- but definitely less autonomy. I won't walk out of the house without my iPhone, and am rarely away from my email or the Sift in case there's something that needs attention. Who is serving who in the networked world? I'm already serving my preferred corporate network person.>> ^Psychologic:
The decision was partly based on the designation of corporations being people, which was an "accidental" designation anyway. I can't really make any educated comments about the effects it will have though.
Tech: Computer networks, or whatever architecture we move towards, will continue to increase in sophistication and "intelligence". As far as free speech, I don't know how to handle that. It's difficult to imagine what those systems will be like at this point, though it may get interesting if distinguishing between human and machine in a virtual environment gets a lot harder.

> ^dag:
It doesn't take an oracle to see that the autonomy of the individual is decreasing.
Really? If anything, I'd say that autonomy is increasing. People have access to an unprecedented amount of information with minimal time investment, and the number of tasks that can be accomplished through tech is increasing monthly. People with disabilities have far more autonomy than they did even 20 years ago, and I can't think of anyone I know who would accept the government "doling out" work unless it were completely optional.
Of course, we could be defining "autonomy" differently. I think there are far more activities available to people today than there have been in the past, and we're still free to choose those activities for ourselves (depending on your country of residence).

The decision was partly based on the designation of corporations being people, which was an "accidental" designation anyway. I can't really make any educated comments about the effects it will have though.

Tech: Computer networks, or whatever architecture we move towards, will continue to increase in sophistication and "intelligence". As far as free speech, I don't know how to handle that. It's difficult to imagine what those systems will be like at this point, though it may get interesting if distinguishing between human and machine in a virtual environment gets a lot harder.


> ^dag:
It doesn't take an oracle to see that the autonomy of the individual is decreasing.

Really? If anything, I'd say that autonomy is increasing. People have access to an unprecedented amount of information with minimal time investment, and the number of tasks that can be accomplished through tech is increasing monthly. People with disabilities have far more autonomy than they did even 20 years ago, and I can't think of anyone I know who would accept the government "doling out" work unless it were completely optional.

Of course, we could be defining "autonomy" differently. I think there are far more activities available to people today than there have been in the past, and we're still free to choose those activities for ourselves (depending on your country of residence).

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

Things are changing quickly in the 21st century. It doesn't take an oracle to see that the autonomy of the individual is decreasing. Tweet much? Check in your location with four-square? the flip-side of being always connected and location identified is that the network knows where you are and what you're doing too. It's just a small jump to figure that we'll have work doled out to us based on where we are and what we're good at.

We're becoming nodes.

Wow, it's like...Plato and Socrates.

Or like Hegel and Nietzsche.

Or Tesla and Edison.

All hail the new oracles of the conservative right, the learned Mr. Beck and the pure Ms. Palin.

I found this on yt the other day and didn't bother posting it as I was sure you had submitted it already, mikes. I guess I'm some sort of oracle now.

If you have questions about the scientific merit of a given medical practice, then contact an expert (i.e. an M.D. Ph.D.) and discuss your concerns with them. Go to a library, and read the actual scientific literature pertaining to a given topic.

It is true there is a business side to medicine, but no one controls science. And in the rare instances that science has been influenced by business, it has always corrected itself. (e.g. Some poor graduate student spent 2 years trying to confirm single molecule transistors and never got it to work. The original data was eventually proven fraudulent. See Jan Schon) Since their conception in 1796, vaccines have proven to a be a valuable way to control the spread of viruses.

In conclusion, it is good to question science and medicine. Questions, however, need to be reinforced with controlled scientific experiments, otherwise they are out of ignorance.


>> ^dag:
^Yes, how dare anyone question the all-knowing oracles of medical knowledge.
I think the reason that many geeky type people always toe the main-stream medical line is because they conflate medicine with science (which we all love). Yes, it's almost the same, but if I had to draw it as a venn diagram, there would be a crescent of over-hang. Medicine to me is 80% science and then the rest is filled in with dogma, patriarchy and business ($$).
That crescent of non-science is the part that makes me squirm. I don't think it's that wrong to question medical programs like vaccinations- with the idea that it may be being pushed non-scientifically by the medical industrial complex. (big pharma).
Bill Maher is not a kook.

>> ^dag:
^Yes, how dare anyone question the all-knowing oracles of medical knowledge.
I think the reason that many geeky type people always toe the main-stream medical line is because they conflate medicine with science (which we all love). Yes, it's almost the same, but if I had to draw it as a venn diagram, there would be a crescent of over-hang. Medicine to me is 80% science and then the rest is filled in with dogma, patriarchy and business ($$).
That crescent of non-science is the part that makes me squirm. I don't think it's that wrong to question medical programs like vaccinations- with the idea that it may be being pushed non-scientifically by the medical industrial complex. (big pharma).
Bill Maher is not a kook.


As Raigen said, in this instance Bill is being a kook. Yes, we need to question everything, especially medicine. But at the end of the day one has to look at the science behind the medicine and make an informed decision. The science, as Frist said, shows that vaccines work and will save your life.

I think it's really funny how, in the last few years, people have begun to fear and distrust vaccines. Smallpox, a disease that killed 300-500 million people in the 20th century alone, was eradicated thanks to vaccines. Thanks to vaccination the occurrence of Polio went from 350,000 cases in 1988 to 1300 cases in 2007.

Vaccines work, ignoring the science kills people. Bill Maher ignores the science. In this instance he is a dangerous kook.

>> ^dag:
^Yes, how dare anyone question the all-knowing oracles of medical knowledge.
I think the reason that many geeky type people always toe the main-stream medical line is because they conflate medicine with science (which we all love). Yes, it's almost the same, but if I had to draw it as a venn diagram, there would be a crescent of over-hang. Medicine to me is 80% science and then the rest is filled in with dogma, patriarchy and business ($$).
That crescent of non-science is the part that makes me squirm. I don't think it's that wrong to question medical programs like vaccinations- with the idea that it may be being pushed non-scientifically by the medical industrial complex. (big pharma).

I'm with you, Dag, on most of those points. Questioning things is what makes someone a skeptic to begin with, and you could apply that Venn Diagram to almost any (if not all) avenues of science. Scientists need funding, and not all are unbiased in their pursuit of knowledge. Please, question "the all-knowing oracles of medical knowledge" until you're blue in the face, but make sure that when you're done you've seen, understood, and accepted the evidence and the facts. Not testimonials and anecdotes. Maher did bring up that Frist used an anecdote, however I'm confident Maher fails to realize that the entire "alternative medicine" movement is based on anecdotes and the placebo effect.


Bill Maher is not a kook.


^And there is where we disagree on the subject of medicine and Mr. Maher. He is plainly a kook when it comes to such a serious subject as this, because he employs the exact same tactics as those religious kooks he fights against. If I could send him an amazing book I own called "Snake Oil Science: The Truth About Complementary and Alternative Medicine" what do you think the chances are he'd read it? And if he defied logic and actually read it, would his mindset allow him to see the truth, based on research and evidence into these sorts of things?

He reminds me of my mother. She's not "spiritual", but she believes almost entirely in "alternative treatments". She once argued with me to get off of my insulin treatment for Diabetes and seek an Acupuncture and more "natural" route to cure it. I calmly told her to look into these things from unbiased sources.

I lent her that book.

She threw it at me.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

Yeah, I suppose I was trying to say that. The professional/practice component is where the dogma, patriarchy and business surface - and for me at least brings medicine out of the pure science realm into something else. We aren't cowed into carrying umbrellas at monthly check-ups with meteorologists.

In reply to this comment by longde:
Re: 20% dogma, patriarchy, and business. You could say the same for the pure sciences. To me, medicine is as much a science as physics and biology, with the difference that there is a professional/practice component that isn't there with the 'pure' sciences.

In reply to this comment by dag:
^Yes, how dare anyone question the all-knowing oracles of medical knowledge.

I think the reason that many geeky type people always toe the main-stream medical line is because they conflate medicine with science (which we all love). Yes, it's almost the same, but if I had to draw it as a venn diagram, there would be a crescent of over-hang. Medicine to me is 80% science and then the rest is filled in with dogma, patriarchy and business ($$).

That crescent of non-science is the part that makes me squirm. I don't think it's that wrong to question medical programs like vaccinations- with the idea that it may be being pushed non-scientifically by the medical industrial complex. (big pharma).

Bill Maher is not a kook.