TIL Jordan Peterson had an iq of 145 and taught at Harvard

submitted by yabbit from (self.TIL)

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Jackalope 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (12 children)

I agree. The psychologists practicing therapy are quacks. However, psychology is not a pseudoscience (as claimed by OP in a separate post) as practiced by advertising companies, politicans and the media - in fact it is a very powerful tool of manipulation.

I don't advocate for the trash practiced by mental health professionals, but we should not foolishly pretend that the entire science of psychology is just quackery, and be aware of psychological manipulation techniques

[–]Canbot 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (8 children)

It is not a science, it is an art. And it is not what it is purported to be. I think what you consider to be the virtues of psychology are more accurately described as sociology and counseling. But even the counseling can be literal lies which can help with disorders. But because the lies are the overwhelming majority one would be remis to not call it pseudoscience.

[–]Jackalope 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

I am thinking also along the lines of Skinner's operant chamber conditioning that has inspired the video game makers and social media companies to create addictive media, or Milgram's experiments asking participants to administer shocks. There is some aspect of science to this, and these guys were not really considered sociologists. But yes, I agree the majority of psychology is pseudoscientific pop psychology, 'mental wellness' and other such nonsense

[–]Canbot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Yes, I agree that work on conditioning is valuable and scientific. I just think that is what is on the brochure while the resort is on the island of Dr Monroe.

[–]Jackalope 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I just think that is what is on the brochure while the resort is on the island of Dr Monroe.

Hahaha yeah, can't disagree.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

What about REMOVING conditioning? If such a thing were feasible, how would that play into things?

[–]Canbot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Look into work that has been done deprogramming cult victims.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Interesting... I was more referring to "could individuals remove their own conditioning?" Such as, for example, stopping groupthink.

[–]Canbot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I think you would have to identify it first which would be the hardest part. But beyond that I imagine it would be like breaking a habit.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That's what I figured. Well, there is an actual science of the mind that makes that easy. There should be an English-language textbook someday...

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

It is a pseudoscience. In fact, the actual exact science of the human mind does exist, and considers psychology to be a special-case particular, a bit like Natural number arithmetics are a subset of actual mathematics, psience considers psychology to be a small subset of the possible states and modes of the human mind.

But it just so happens that this subset is the only one being reinforced at every turn, so that makes psychology look more scientific than it is, and especially, yield much better results than it should.

But as this newer exact science spreads, we will see psychology become an old memory. I wonder what JBP would say about that.

[–]Jackalope 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

It is a pseudoscience.

psience considers psychology to be a small subset of the possible states and modes of the human mind.

But as this newer exact science spreads,

If psychology is a subset of the true exact science of psience, then it is not in fact pseudoscientific, but incomplete like all of our science.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It isn't a subset as a field. Rather it is a field about a subset of the mind. As such, it isn't only incomplete, it fails at encompassing the object of its study, the human mind, by admitting and recognizing only a small subset of said object. That is why it can be pseudoscience while being somewhat related to an actual science. A bit like you might say alchemy is somewhat related to chemistry, while being entirely different.