Something about Psychology.

[Fidelbrand]

Heard my friends said this before, but read from a book recently, decide to share it with you:

" What you critcise of someone, is in fact the most hated part of your character. If someone's misbehavior gets to your nerve, it means that you possess that attribute of that misbehavior inside yourself.... something you hate inside yourself. Vice versa, what you most like about that person, is in fact what you want yourself to be."

Do you agree?

E.g. Following this logic (if i got it correctly) we dislike capitalism because we desire for capitalism inside our mind, but we just oppress that feeling and we hate it, that's why we vamp our anger and show our dislike for capitalism? :blink:

[Chad King]

Isnt that Freud?

Anyways... no, I dont agree. I really dont like womanizers, and Id get pretty pissed off if someone tried to call me a womanizer underneath that "logic", because now, Im a romantic and the girls I spend my time with, I make it absolutely enjoyable and all that romantic... crap ;)

[gaf]

it is a way to say anything and nothing.........
don't forget the only person who can understand you.it is yourself(i mean nobodyelse,otherwise this is agorantie en/of stupidity). dont lose it (yourself), because then you'll lose yourself.be what you want to be!!!!!!!!!!!this is your only freedom.....

[Pedro Alonso Lopez]

What you hate the most influences you the most, that is true.

[elijahcraig]

I think this is referring to certain things which you not only "hate" but which you "resent" and have contempt for; it also doesn't apply to things like "captialism" and such which are not character traits and such, but systems of economics.

I agree with Geist.

[Vinny Rafarino]

Any psychiatrist will constantly remind you (I forget who it was that said this first)

"Psychology is not an exact science"

[elijahcraig]

Yes, it varies, and attempting to apply it in an eternal law way is ridiculous.

[Wenty]

That is just one area of Psychology though, i.e. Psychodynamic. There are many different psychologists that i'm sure would take a different slant on this idea, be it biological, cognitive or whatever.

[The idealist]

I think it is true. Ever heard of the freudian egg?



Superego

Ego

Id


The superego is the cultural and outside influences
the ego is the part of us we are aware of, it is "us"
the id is the basic desires, instincts and so forth


" What you critcise of someone, is in fact the most hated part of your character. If someone's misbehavior gets to your nerve, it means that you possess that attribute of that misbehavior inside yourself.... something you hate inside yourself. Vice versa, what you most like about that person, is in fact what you want yourself to be."

You have the want (Id) but your concience (superego) stops you (ego) from doing it. You still hate that person or idea because you feel that want inside yourself and your morals make you hate it. It doesn't mean you (your ego) wants to do it.



Isnt that Freud?

Anyways... no, I dont agree. I really dont like womanizers, and Id get pretty pissed off if someone tried to call me a womanizer underneath that "logic", because now, Im a romantic and the girls I spend my time with, I make it absolutely enjoyable and all that romantic... crap ;)


You hate a successfull womanizer because your Id effects your ego in a small way, perhaps even verging on the subliminal, and makes you wish you had that success.

Other people have no wish what so ever for such an empty relationship and perhaps focus too much on the emotional side of things, ignoring passion. They are more likely to pity the womanizer, not hate. but they forget that relationships need passion AND love.

You hate the being called a womanizer, only because of that small urge, passion.

We all want extremes sometimes don't we? Sex with no strings, or pure and true friendship and love etc.
Thank the stars that according to this theory you are perfectly normal.

Same with

E.g. Following this logic (if i got it correctly) we dislike capitalism because we desire for capitalism inside our mind, but we just oppress that feeling and we hate it, that's why we vamp our anger and show our dislike for capitalism?

You got it in one. We have the bit inside us that says "fuck the others, be greedy. Take everything for yourself. Be capitalist. Strive to the top by pressing down on others", but our morals and upbringing stop us.
But just because our morals push us away from capitalisme does not mean that all other convictions do not. They just swing in another direction away from the black hole of pure capitalisme. That does not mean they do not have black holes of their own.

[Fidelbrand]

comrades, thanks so much for the fruitful replies. The arguments sprouted by ALL of you have educated me~ cheers..

[Wenty]

not sure i agree with the id, superego, and the ego. Its said he thought of 3 parts because in Vienna where he was living at the time all the appartments had 3 levels to them.

[The idealist]

If the boot fits, wear it.

[themessiah]

having emotions is not the same as having an illness

which is what psychology says

the world of capitalism is THAT horrid, THAT exploitive, THAT miserable, THAT underhanded, THAT vile that people MUST be drugged in order to bear it

the problem is the LIES it fucntions under, such as the world of today is so much more advanced, we will live for that much longer, we are so much smarter, can do so much more, BULLSHIT. we are treated like brain dead idiots and expected to treat others like that. and for the exact reason Marx said, so as to prohibit thinking in common since doing so could give rise to revolution. instead we are torn from our fellow people, drugged in order to endure it and told that feeling sad really means you are sick. look at rush hour. a million cars all going to the same place with only one person in every one of them. cubicles designed upon arrival to furthur the segregation. all forms of entertainment function to endorse rivalry: sports, gameshows, reality TV. humanity is a social order and we are being forced to live in isolation from the order in order to portect the interests of the capitalists. their money.

modern model families are shown as being deceptive, argumentive and abusive and we are told this is realistic. however, the question is being begged. a unified family presents a unified threat to capital. and unified families can potentially seek out and ally themselves with other unified families. so, the unified family is placed under direct assault under the pretense of reality. we are told how to think and how to act and then lied to saying we have a choice about it.

here is a study that will NEVER be done. take one hundred average people and remove them from TV for a month. then send them grocery shopping. my hypothesis is that THEY WILL NOT KNOW WHAT TO BUY. TV tells them what to buy. just like TV tells them what to think, and how to act. this is called freedom of choice. but when not told what to choose, we realize we never had a fucking choice in the first place. I would say that the shopping experience after being removed from TV would last 100 to 300 % longer than it would under the influence of TV. this is why people need drugs. it is SO OBVIOUS. we are being controlled and we are being lied to and we are being drugged because we are being controlled and lied to. those who talk about it are drugged so they won't talk about it. imprisoned if they do. we all know this. and we are drugged because we know this. and because we want to talk about this. we are sedated so we don't do anything about this.

so I'll sit back and drink my cola, akin to victory gin and join the latest eugenic health crusade, smoking is it?, watch the most popular shows and cut my grass just like that ad where everybody is doing the exact same thing at the exact same time while the van rolls around spraying chemicals in the air. DDT? sedatives? nerve gas? tear gas? no, anti allergies. my mistake

[DaCuBaN]

Its said he thought of 3 parts because in Vienna where he was living at the time all the appartments had 3 levels to them

Why does this nullify the argument? They say newton watched an apple fall from a tree and proposed gravity. This has since been empirically proved (gravity, that is).

Simply because there was an 'outside influence' helping his thought process does in no way nullify the argument. I don't know if I myself accept it, but it's still valid.

[Wenty]

They say newton watched an apple fall from a tree and proposed gravity

He made this up afterwards to prove he thought of it before anyone else.


Why does this nullify the argument?

If it has influenced him considerably then it weakens the truth of it ever actually being true.

[The Children of the Revolution]

"What you critcise of someone, is in fact the most hated part of your character. If someone's misbehavior gets to your nerve, it means that you possess that attribute of that misbehavior inside yourself.... something you hate inside yourself. Vice versa, what you most like about that person, is in fact what you want yourself to be."


I've heard this argument before. I rejected it then; I reject it now! On a personal note, I don't get along particularly well with "loud" types. Overconfident attention seekers and their ilk. ("Lookatme! Lookatme!! Lookatme!!! Lookatme!!!! Lookatme!!!!!") I am quiet and reserved - and I resent any implication that my life is a sham; that I actually harbour a secret desire to BE one of these extroverted loudmouths.

It just isn't true. I have looked deep within myself and I am utterly content with being shy. I wouldn't want to change if I could.

And of course, we can flip the situation around... Consider the wild party animal and his opinion of me. He may very well hate me; hate my introverted nature; hate the fact that there are times when I just want to be alone. Well? Follow the logic of this thesis... We each possess the "qualities" that we so dislike in the other... We are both living a lie... Our roles ought to be reversed???



"Psychology is not an exact science"


Correct!

[themessiah]

psychology is not a science at all

it is a pseudo science

like biology or astrology

NOTHING is allowed to count against it, whereas all science operates under the principle that ALL must coutn against it. this principle is falsification. psychology is UNFALSIFIABLE and therefore UNSCIENTIFIC.

[The idealist]

Psychology is the study of the actions and thoughts emerging from the chaos of the human brain. By understanding this we can slowly close the gap between where physics and chemistry give up and where psychology takes hold.


If it has influenced him considerably then it weakens the truth of it ever actually being true.

The ways the scientists (and psychologists) get inspiration may change the way they present their theory, but does not make them untrue but possibly harder to understand.

Had Freud been in a bungalow at the time, he could have made a totally different presentation of his theory where the different mental areas were set up side by side instead of above and below each other.

This would perhaps have been more difficult to understand, as our moral values would see the superego (cultural morals) and Id (instincts, lusts) as being equal. The aforementioned moral values would rather see the Superego on top (what is right) and the Id at the bottom (Animal instincts, want to do wrong etc.).

So although the sources of inspiration can affect the presentation, they would have a hard time doing any damage to hard maths and theories.

"They may bend them, but they sure as hell won't break them."

[DaCuBaN]

Originally posted by [email protected] 8 2004, 10:17 AM

They say newton watched an apple fall from a tree and proposed gravity

He made this up afterwards to prove he thought of it before anyone else.


Why does this nullify the argument?

If it has influenced him considerably then it weakens the truth of it ever actually being true.
You missed out my emphasis on the original quote. The point of buildings in vienna being 3 stories high is just as absurd as that of the apple falling on newton's head

It's a weak argument to discredit it.

Again, I must reiterate that I don't really accept the original argument, but it does, still, remain valid in this context.

[themessiah]

yes thats all fine and well

but nobody here can counter the fact that although psychology is the antithesis of science, it is not only treated as scientific, but MEDICALLY SCIENTIFIC!!!

in other words, FOR YOUR HEALTH, the field of psycology, which operates with the same scientific validity as someone looking at where you moon ascended in your birth chart, dictates what you can and can not do. what emotions you should and should not feel. who should be locked away indefinately in a loonie bin. when to do the things you do, and where you do them. try walking around a mall talking to people you don't know and watch what happens.

remember, NON ASSOCIATION between people is what prevents communism from working. so cower away from others. don't talk to anyone. ridicule and report those who don't. and do this all because something that is NOT SCIENTIFIC is BRANDED AS MEDICALLY SCIENTIFIC.

get it?

[themessiah]

"so cower away from others. don't talk to anyone. ridicule and report those who don't. "

GRAMMAR PATROL:

REPORT THOSE WHO DON'T(cower away from others and who DON'T talk to anyone(ie. do not NOT talk to anyone))

[The idealist]

You high on pot or something themessiah?? :D

Not saying that your argument is invalid or anything. It is probably quite good.

If only I could understand it. :huh:

[themessiah]

my point is simple

as far as science effects us, individually, medical science is the most important. it is designed to protect and heal us. keep us healthy. lengthen our lives. cure disease. we MUST trust it more than any other science for it is most repsonsible for us, as individuals, and our lives.

psychology, which is not even REGULAR SCIENTIFIC, is treated as MEDICALLY SCIENTIFIC.

get my point?

thought that was clear.

[rebelgames]

Originally posted by [email protected] 6 2004, 07:37 PM
Heard my friends said this before, but read from a book recently, decide to share it with you:

" What you critcise of someone, is in fact the most hated part of your character. If someone's misbehavior gets to your nerve, it means that you possess that attribute of that misbehavior inside yourself.... something you hate inside yourself. Vice versa, what you most like about that person, is in fact what you want yourself to be."

Do you agree?

E.g. Following this logic (if i got it correctly) we dislike capitalism because we desire for capitalism inside our mind, but we just oppress that feeling and we hate it, that's why we vamp our anger and show our dislike for capitalism? :blink:
I think it is what you hate most is what you fear you are not so much as what you are.

[Trissy]

psychology is not a science at all

it is a pseudo science

like biology or astrology

NOTHING is allowed to count against it, whereas all science operates under the principle that ALL must count against it. this principle is falsification. psychology is UNFALSIFIABLE and therefore UNSCIENTIFIC.
It's a tad unfair to say that all psychology is pseudo science. Popper made the point about Psychoanalysis and not all Psychology. Behaviourism can be held to be a science under the Falsificationist demarcation between science and pseudo science, and I'm sure some others could also be said to be sciences.

Oh and how is Biology not a science? It has certain areas such as Biochemistry which certainly pass for science under the Falsificationist definition, and I'd argue that others pass as science too. I fail to see how you could begin to compare it to the Psychoanalytic claim (or indeed the Marxist claim) to be a science.

Also the view of Science you are proposing (Falsificationism) is just one view of science. Inductionists and people who agree with Kuhn's view of Science (like I do) can provide different definitions of science.


but nobody here can counter the fact that although psychology is the antithesis of science, it is not only treated as scientific, but MEDICALLY SCIENTIFIC!!!
Only if you accept the Falsificationist idea of science. The Falsificationist view of science has to abandon any claim to be able to provide concrete 'TRUTH', and instead make do with 'the most accurate we can be at this time', which many scientists would not be prepared to settle for.


in other words, FOR YOUR HEALTH, the field of psychology, which operates with the same scientific validity as someone looking at where you moon ascended in your birth chart, dictates what you can and can not do. what emotions you should and should not feel. who should be locked away indefinately in a loonie bin. when to do the things you do, and where you do them. try walking around a mall talking to people you don't know and watch what happens.

But science is hardly free from Capitalist control is it? Modern science is more a tool of Capitalism then many scientists would care to admit. Drugs companies work almost solely for profit, most advances in the field of genetics and fertility treatment help only the rich, and a vast number of other breakthroughs are only available to the wealthy.

Science is not this unbiased pursuit of truth that many people like to believe, and it's not necessarily done for the benefit of the whole human race either. Science now has a new Master...and this Master is profit!

Also...why didn't you just post a link to your previously stated views about psychology Hazard??? Here...allow me to do it for you since you're too shy to do so yourself...

Hazard/themessiah/the messiah formerly known as Hazard reveals to us the true nature of Psychology. Amazing! (http://www.che-lives.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=22301)

[Vinny Rafarino]

Originally posted by [email protected] 8 2004, 07:02 PM
psychology is not a science at all

it is a pseudo science

like biology or astrology

NOTHING is allowed to count against it, whereas all science operates under the principle that ALL must coutn against it. this principle is falsification. psychology is UNFALSIFIABLE and therefore UNSCIENTIFIC.
This is one of the most absurd things I have ever read. You may friend are completely out of touch.