i apologise for assuming you liked freud - i think i have my wires crossed with someone else. in any case i am always glad to hear when people are suspicious of him, because there is good reason to be. i highly recommend reading "the unknown freud" by frederick crews.

to respond point by point:

1. yes, i agree that the human condition has been examined for thousands of years, and that 'psychology' in some form began with the ancient greeks, if not earlier. but this is oversimplifying things dramatically, and it becomes an argument of definition. i refer to psychology as psychological SCIENCE, which -is- (relatively) new. this difference is not trivial -- until the 19th century, our hypotheses about the human condition were untested. psychological science allows us to see if our philosophies about human perception, cognition, and behaviour, are demonstrably true.

2. the humanists/third wave occupied an important space and time, but were overshadowed by behaviourism/cognitivism. still, i think a lot of people outside of psychology have heard of abraham maslow and his 'hierarchy of needs'. not only that, but humanist psychologists were responsible for the development of the 'client-centered approach', which was hugely influential. i would disagree with you here and say that in research, and clinical psychology, humanist trends are vitally important. in fact, a relatively new sub-discipline within psychology called "positive psychology" is burgeoning. i would suggest that perhaps the reason it seems discouraged is because psychology is so unbelievably broad now, and neuroscience is becoming increasingly popular, that it seems as though interest in wellbeing is small. i don't think it truly is.

3. well, i suspect here we have a true divide that we can't agree on. you believe we have failed in understanding the human condition because of something i believe doesn't exist. i think we understand the human condition fairly well, given our short (scientific) time at examining it. but it is an unwieldly, hugely complex beast, and we are just at the beginning.

and with regard to your points on bashing psychology:

1. if you want to understand a human, it is useful to understand the workings of the brain. would you let a surgeon operate without training? i'm not sure what the problem is with emphasising that students of the science of human thought and behaviour learn how the biology of the mind works.

2. yes, rates are up. population is also up. ability to diagnose accurately is also up. recognition that people have problems, instead of pretending they're fine, is also up. look, i see what you're saying, and it's perfectly reasonable, but i think this problem is enormously complex, and blaming psychology is misplaced.

>> ^enoch:

SDGundam nailed it.
and i dont have anything against psychology as a whole,to do so would be ignoring the many MANY advancements in understanding the human mind.
that being said i have to admit a revulsion to freud (his discovery non-withstanding) i found his conclusions entirely bleak and apocalyptic as i also did neitzche.
this is my opinion but i could make a strong argument for my case.
now i am going to engage in a tactic i really dislike (the bullet argument) but i shall do so in order to maybe communicate a bit where i am coming from NOT to win/lose an argument.
because i do not see this as an argument ...just a differing of opinion based on not only my own bias and prejudice but berticus as well.(hmmm..maybe it IS an argument LOL).
1.psychological/behavioral sciences are new in name only.history reveals that understanding the human condition and mind have been studied for thousands of years see:mystery schools,jesuits etc etc.
2.i am gladdened by the new batch of "humanists",though in american higher education this is..discouraged..due to employment issues,money etc etc.those who do pursue that branch of study might as well become hippies or a talk show host.not much money in that field.
3.you are correct in the vast literature concerning the things we are talking about and should there be any surprise in that fact?
i dont think so.it is the fundamental part of being human to talk about the things that touch us,to attempt to understand ourselves as people and as a society... for good or ill.
i have come to the conclusion (maybe incorrectly) that the great philosophers/psychologists of our time have ultimately failed in their conclusions due to the fact that they totally ignore the ongoing battle between spirit and ego.
humanists at least recognize that there is something more.they may not call it spirit/soul but they do realize that there is a dynamic that people like freud missed entirely.
hell..freud concluded that the ego was EVERYTHING..which puts him in the douchebag column.(mass marketing anyone?).
does this dismiss freud accomplishments? no.
just as i wont dismiss neitzche (even though he was a depressive asshat who we would call EMO nowadays).
i find hegel to be particularly abominable in his conclusions but that does not detract from his brilliance.
jung and r d lang's conclusions were just as flawed and for the same reasons the freud/hegel were flawed.
their conclusions lacked a complete dynamic.
this "third wave" is beginning to address these flaws but the way i see it the elements they are bringing to the table have been in front of us for 3000 yrs.
hence my comment.
let me end this particularly long comment with a few points to why i may be perceived as bashing psychology (rightly so in my opinion).
1.greater and greater pressure put on students to pursue bio-chem for a choice in the field.
2.in america suicides are up.unhappiness is up and the new "maladies of the day" bi-polar,adhd and panic anxiety disorder are up by staggering rates.over the past 20 yrs anti-psychotics,ssri's and sedatives are up exponentially..1000's of percentage points higher than 20 yrs ago.
all with the avg time before diagnosis? 1 1/2 hrs.
i could go on for quite a bit longer but i feel these points suffice to make my point.
conclusion=epic fail.
while my comment may have had a snarky flavor my sentiments were sincere.
i am over-joyed that practical applications based on a more humanistic approach are seriously being considered instead of pumping people full of meds (with full understanding that meds are a necessity at times).
i am assisting a friend who just entered her master program for psychology and i am appalled at the depth of indoctrination and lack of opposing philosophies and understanding and she is being pressured to pursue bio-chem and marginalize any other train or pursuit.
please understand that i am self taught and most likely have gaps in not only my studies but understanding and welcome any opposing thoughts or understanding my friend.
you have always been respectful berticus and while at times we may disagree thats exactly how i look at it..a disagreement and not a forum on who we are as people.
if my thought process is wrong or misguided i would love to hear what you have to say my friend.

SDGundam nailed it.
and i dont have anything against psychology as a whole,to do so would be ignoring the many MANY advancements in understanding the human mind.
that being said i have to admit a revulsion to freud (his discovery non-withstanding) i found his conclusions entirely bleak and apocalyptic as i also did neitzche.
this is my opinion but i could make a strong argument for my case.

now i am going to engage in a tactic i really dislike (the bullet argument) but i shall do so in order to maybe communicate a bit where i am coming from NOT to win/lose an argument.
because i do not see this as an argument ...just a differing of opinion based on not only my own bias and prejudice but berticus as well.(hmmm..maybe it IS an argument LOL).
1.psychological/behavioral sciences are new in name only.history reveals that understanding the human condition and mind have been studied for thousands of years see:mystery schools,jesuits etc etc.
2.i am gladdened by the new batch of "humanists",though in american higher education this is..discouraged..due to employment issues,money etc etc.those who do pursue that branch of study might as well become hippies or a talk show host.not much money in that field.
3.you are correct in the vast literature concerning the things we are talking about and should there be any surprise in that fact?
i dont think so.it is the fundamental part of being human to talk about the things that touch us,to attempt to understand ourselves as people and as a society... for good or ill.

i have come to the conclusion (maybe incorrectly) that the great philosophers/psychologists of our time have ultimately failed in their conclusions due to the fact that they totally ignore the ongoing battle between spirit and ego.
humanists at least recognize that there is something more.they may not call it spirit/soul but they do realize that there is a dynamic that people like freud missed entirely.
hell..freud concluded that the ego was EVERYTHING..which puts him in the douchebag column.(mass marketing anyone?).
does this dismiss freud accomplishments? no.
just as i wont dismiss neitzche (even though he was a depressive asshat who we would call EMO nowadays).
i find hegel to be particularly abominable in his conclusions but that does not detract from his brilliance.
jung and r d lang's conclusions were just as flawed and for the same reasons the freud/hegel were flawed.
their conclusions lacked a complete dynamic.
this "third wave" is beginning to address these flaws but the way i see it the elements they are bringing to the table have been in front of us for 3000 yrs.
hence my comment.

let me end this particularly long comment with a few points to why i may be perceived as bashing psychology (rightly so in my opinion).
1.greater and greater pressure put on students to pursue bio-chem for a choice in the field.
2.in america suicides are up.unhappiness is up and the new "maladies of the day" bi-polar,adhd and panic anxiety disorder are up by staggering rates.over the past 20 yrs anti-psychotics,ssri's and sedatives are up exponentially..1000's of percentage points higher than 20 yrs ago.
all with the avg time before diagnosis? 1 1/2 hrs.
i could go on for quite a bit longer but i feel these points suffice to make my point.
conclusion=epic fail.

while my comment may have had a snarky flavor my sentiments were sincere.
i am over-joyed that practical applications based on a more humanistic approach are seriously being considered instead of pumping people full of meds (with full understanding that meds are a necessity at times).

i am assisting a friend who just entered her master program for psychology and i am appalled at the depth of indoctrination and lack of opposing philosophies and understanding and she is being pressured to pursue bio-chem and marginalize any other train or pursuit.

please understand that i am self taught and most likely have gaps in not only my studies but understanding and welcome any opposing thoughts or understanding my friend.
you have always been respectful berticus and while at times we may disagree thats exactly how i look at it..a disagreement and not a forum on who we are as people.
if my thought process is wrong or misguided i would love to hear what you have to say my friend.

i know we've clashed over bi-polar disorder before enoch, but i liked this one - especially the inclusion of erotomania. oh, and the great music.

Absolutely they can. I may have worded that wrong. The point I was trying to make is the schizophrenia is one of the rare mental health disorders where medication is really the only treatment that is really effective. Whereas other mental health disorders such as bi-polar, depression, etc. can be addressed effectively with both a combination medication and/or counseling. Essentially, schizophrenia can't be addressed with only counseling unlike, say depression or anxiety (obviously depending on the severity of the case, of course).
I hope I wasn't too confusing with my explanation.

In reply to this comment by xxovercastxx:
You don't think medications can help, say, bi-polar, depression or anxiety disorders?

In reply to this comment by brycewi19:
As a psychotherapist, schizophrenia is a very tough condition to treat. No amount of therapy without proper medication can make a dent in the symptoms. It's one of the few mental health diagnoses where medication (anti-psychotics) really does help.

You don't think medications can help, say, bi-polar, depression or anxiety disorders?

In reply to this comment by brycewi19:
As a psychotherapist, schizophrenia is a very tough condition to treat. No amount of therapy without proper medication can make a dent in the symptoms. It's one of the few mental health diagnoses where medication (anti-psychotics) really does help.

What I was calling out was the specific scientific stuff such as the thing retards keep doing where they use string thery and missunderstanding of quantum physics to justify mystic mumbojumbo.


I will quite hapily listen to sumone just make philasophical claims or generaly just talk about something , so long as its logically sound.

its just meditating when people dont get basic science correct and then put there incorect interpritation of it into a vidoe.


>> ^enoch:

>> ^westy:
>> ^enoch:
interesting comment westy.
your main point addresses a small fraction of the videos content,contesting a point the video was only indirectly talking about and then turn around and basically agree with what this video is saying..semantics aside.
maybe you are bi-polar my friend.

my issue is that sum one is not going to have much creditability in philosophical arguments if they haven't understood fairly obvious things in science.
anny thing that he says in the video that is true is pretty obvious but presented in an overly complicated way.
the video in gneral is convoluted.

i would not call philosophy a science but rather a system of pushing and pressing boundaries by way of questioning and examination and attempting to understand the confines of this reality and how we..as humanity..fit in that context.
i would tend to agree with you that this mans presentation may be a tad verbose but when you understand that he is also infusing a lot of eastern philosophy in conflation with west.since most here are familiar..even if they dont realize it..with western philosophy..what he proposes may appear to be total gibberish.
i may not agree with everything this man puts forth but i admire his efforts to explain the battle between the ego and the soul.something which western philosophy utterly fails to do but eastern philosophy addresses often and is actually a prime tenant.
the thing that bothers me about western psychology is the prevalence of administering psychotropic drugs after only an hour long session to diagnose.this video and others like it offer a different path for those who may suffer or experience bi-polar/mania/depression by way of self exploration and awareness of oneself.
ones true self.
now i am of the belief we are spirit,you may not but this video can still be helpful to those who do not believe in spirit by simply understanding and addressing their ego.because once you understand and have identified what the ego is is you can now begin the process of dealing with it.
not all healing can be found in medication.

no misunderstanding - i understood what your comment to rougy meant and that it wasn't related to me personally. i used it to close my comment in an attempt at solidarity and closure. in other words, you and rougy are both nice people who i'd rather get along with than argue endlessly (which is the only direction i see any further discussion on the topic heading, and thus my reluctance to continue).

In reply to this comment by enoch:
In reply to this comment by berticus:
I've done plenty in the past, rougy, and found the concepts were largely peddled by charlatans and fools. I'm sorry that my skepticism clearly offends you.

If you think I don't go against the 'common consensus' - you really don't know much about me at all. That's understandable, you have limited interaction with me here on VS, and it's usually over something you clearly believe in and I don't.

I considered offering a reply to both you and enoch (who left a charming message on my profile), but really—what's the point? It's obvious that your minds are, somewhat ironically, set. Clearly you both find this man's views insightful and truthful. I think they are not only untrue, they are dangerous—and these are topics I am academically invested in.

I suggest we leave it at that.

As enoch says, "right on, brother".

>> ^rougy:

>> ^berticus:
jesus fuck this is some grade A bullshit
sorry enoch

You haven't done much self exploration, have you Berti?
You don't go against the common consensus very often, either, do you?
What part of that video was "grade A bullshit" in your learned opinion?


i was sincere in my comment on your page.
maybe my comment on rougy's page made what i said to you seem insincere..i guess i can understand that but that is not how i meant it.
what i wrote to rougy was for rougy and had nothing to do with you.
i applaud his ability to speak his mind hence the "right on brother".
it was meant in that context and not in any way to disparage you.

maybe i read to much into what you posted but i do not like when there may be a misunderstanding based solely on comments.
as you so stated to rougy "you dont know me"..
you are right..i do not know you and the only thing i do know is that we disagree on some things.
while i do find some of the things this man proposes insightful,i would not go so far as call them truthful but rather seeking a different avenue to deal with a specific problem.

i would like to ask you where you got the idea that i would not be receptive to anything you have to say on this matter though,because i do not believe i have ever given you any indication that my ideas/philosophies are written in concrete and impervious to scrutiny.

yes..i am metaphysical but have i ever tried to convert you?or make you feel/believe/be anything than who you are at this point in your life?
i accept you for who you are,or at least who you portray here on VS and as i have already stated:i respect your keen mind and sharp wit and i truly..with all humbleness and sincerity..would like to hear your thoughts concerning this video and the dangers you see inherent within.

i think we could both find many and as i have stated in my previous comment to you..i found only one aspect of the video intriguing and for what reasons.
i would like to hear your thoughts though because i do not know everything and anecdotal evidence only goes so far.
i welcome your thoughts on this matter.
maybe you can get me to view this in a different light and perspective.

i shall leave this comment public.
i forgot how you dislike private messages and for that i apologize.
but my previous comment was sincere,
as is this one.
namaste.

In reply to this comment by berticus:
I've done plenty in the past, rougy, and found the concepts were largely peddled by charlatans and fools. I'm sorry that my skepticism clearly offends you.

If you think I don't go against the 'common consensus' - you really don't know much about me at all. That's understandable, you have limited interaction with me here on VS, and it's usually over something you clearly believe in and I don't.

I considered offering a reply to both you and enoch (who left a charming message on my profile), but really—what's the point? It's obvious that your minds are, somewhat ironically, set. Clearly you both find this man's views insightful and truthful. I think they are not only untrue, they are dangerous—and these are topics I am academically invested in.

I suggest we leave it at that.

As enoch says, "right on, brother".

>> ^rougy:

>> ^berticus:
jesus fuck this is some grade A bullshit
sorry enoch

You haven't done much self exploration, have you Berti?
You don't go against the common consensus very often, either, do you?
What part of that video was "grade A bullshit" in your learned opinion?


i was sincere in my comment on your page.
maybe my comment on rougy's page made what i said to you seem insincere..i guess i can understand that but that is not how i meant it.
what i wrote to rougy was for rougy and had nothing to do with you.
i applaud his ability to speak his mind hence the "right on brother".
it was meant in that context and not in any way to disparage you.

maybe i read to much into what you posted but i do not like when there may be a misunderstanding based solely on comments.
as you so stated to rougy "you dont know me"..
you are right..i do not know you and the only thing i do know is that we disagree on some things.
while i do find some of the things this man proposes insightful,i would not go so far as call them truthful but rather seeking a different avenue to deal with a specific problem.

i would like to ask you where you got the idea that i would not be receptive to anything you have to say on this matter though,because i do not believe i have ever given you any indication that my ideas/philosophies are written in concrete and impervious to scrutiny.

yes..i am metaphysical but have i ever tried to convert you?or make you feel/believe/be anything than who you are at this point in your life?
i accept you for who you are,or at least who you portray here on VS and as i have already stated:i respect your keen mind and sharp wit and i truly..with all humbleness and sincerity..would like to hear your thoughts concerning this video and the dangers you see inherent within.

i think we could both find many and as i have stated in my previous comment to you..i found only one aspect of the video intriguing and for what reasons.
i would like to hear your thoughts though because i do not know everything and anecdotal evidence only goes so far.
i welcome your thoughts on this matter.
maybe you can get me to view this in a different light and perspective.

i shall leave this comment public.
i forgot how you dislike private messages and for that i apologize.
but my previous comment was sincere,
as is this one.
namaste.

I read an article recently that pointed out that maybe the reason there is so much depression in western societies like the USA is because there is truly so much to be depressed about. It suggested that the depressed people weren't really "sick" as much as they were sensitive to, and aware of, the many failings of our culture, especially regarding things like fairness and justice.

Bi-polar is a little different animal than mere depression, and I personally think there are different manifestations of psychological illnesses ranging from, say, heredity to behavioral.

But I didn't see anything that would earn the "grade A bullshit" label of disapproval in this video.

That would be the Flip Wilson "The devil made me do it" defense.

I've done plenty in the past, rougy, and found the concepts were largely peddled by charlatans and fools. I'm sorry that my skepticism clearly offends you.

If you think I don't go against the 'common consensus' - you really don't know much about me at all. That's understandable, you have limited interaction with me here on VS, and it's usually over something you clearly believe in and I don't.

I considered offering a reply to both you and enoch (who left a charming message on my profile), but really—what's the point? It's obvious that your minds are, somewhat ironically, set. Clearly you both find this man's views insightful and truthful. I think they are not only untrue, they are dangerous—and these are topics I am academically invested in.

I suggest we leave it at that.

As enoch says, "right on, brother".

>> ^rougy:

>> ^berticus:
jesus fuck this is some grade A bullshit
sorry enoch

You haven't done much self exploration, have you Berti?
You don't go against the common consensus very often, either, do you?
What part of that video was "grade A bullshit" in your learned opinion?

>> ^westy:

>> ^enoch:
interesting comment westy.
your main point addresses a small fraction of the videos content,contesting a point the video was only indirectly talking about and then turn around and basically agree with what this video is saying..semantics aside.
maybe you are bi-polar my friend.

my issue is that sum one is not going to have much creditability in philosophical arguments if they haven't understood fairly obvious things in science.
anny thing that he says in the video that is true is pretty obvious but presented in an overly complicated way.
the video in gneral is convoluted.


i would not call philosophy a science but rather a system of pushing and pressing boundaries by way of questioning and examination and attempting to understand the confines of this reality and how we..as humanity..fit in that context.

i would tend to agree with you that this mans presentation may be a tad verbose but when you understand that he is also infusing a lot of eastern philosophy in conflation with west.since most here are familiar..even if they dont realize it..with western philosophy..what he proposes may appear to be total gibberish.

i may not agree with everything this man puts forth but i admire his efforts to explain the battle between the ego and the soul.something which western philosophy utterly fails to do but eastern philosophy addresses often and is actually a prime tenant.

the thing that bothers me about western psychology is the prevalence of administering psychotropic drugs after only an hour long session to diagnose.this video and others like it offer a different path for those who may suffer or experience bi-polar/mania/depression by way of self exploration and awareness of oneself.
ones true self.
now i am of the belief we are spirit,you may not but this video can still be helpful to those who do not believe in spirit by simply understanding and addressing their ego.because once you understand and have identified what the ego is is you can now begin the process of dealing with it.

not all healing can be found in medication.

>> ^berticus:

jesus fuck this is some grade A bullshit
sorry enoch


You haven't done much self exploration, have you Berti?

You don't go against the common consensus very often, either, do you?

What part of that video was "grade A bullshit" in your learned opinion?

>> ^enoch:

interesting comment westy.
your main point addresses a small fraction of the videos content,contesting a point the video was only indirectly talking about and then turn around and basically agree with what this video is saying..semantics aside.
maybe you are bi-polar my friend.


my issue is that sum one is not going to have much creditability in philosophical arguments if they haven't understood fairly obvious things in science.

anny thing that he says in the video that is true is pretty obvious but presented in an overly complicated way.
the video in gneral is convoluted.

interesting comment westy.
your main point addresses a small fraction of the videos content,contesting a point the video was only indirectly talking about and then turn around and basically agree with what this video is saying..semantics aside.

maybe you are bi-polar my friend.

Yeah, I get it,
You're an outcast.
Always under attack.
Always coming in last,
Bringing up the past.
No one owes you anything.
I think you need a shotgun blast,
A kick in the ass,
So paranoid. . .
Watch your back!!

Oh my, here we go...

Another lose cannon gone bi-polar
Slipped down, couldn't get much lower.
Quicksand's got no sense of humor.
I'm still laughing like hell.
You think that by crying to me
Looking so sorry that I'm gonna believe,
You've been infected by a social disease.
Well, then take your medicine.

[Chorus:]
I created the Sound of Madness.
Wrote the book on pain.
Somehow I'm still here,
To explain,
That the darkest hour never comes in the night.
You can sleep with a gun.
When you gonna wake up and fight... for yourself?

I'm so sick of this tombstone mentality,
If there's an afterlife,
Then it'll set you free.
But I'm not gonna part the seas
You're a self-fulfilling prophecy.
You think that crying to me,
Looking so sorry that I'm gonna believe,
You've been infected by a social disease.
Well, then take your medicine.

[Chorus]

I created the Sound of Madness.
Wrote the book on pain.
Somehow I'm still here,
To explain,
That the darkest hour never comes in the night.
You can sleep with a gun.
When you gonna wake up...
When you gonna wake up and fight...

[Chorus]

When you gonna wake up and fight... for yourself? [x3]