+- Bring4th (https://www.bring4th.org/forums)
+-- Forum: Bring4th Community (https://www.bring4th.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=16)
+--- Forum: Olio (https://www.bring4th.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Thread: How psychologists subvert democratic movement (/showthread.php?tid=5781)
RE: How psychologists subvert democratic movement - zenmaster - 10-25-2012
(10-25-2012, 12:17 PM)Siren Wrote: No need for "influential" people. If all the Average Joes would but stop doing what they are doing right now and get into a cave/forest/island or other isolated place and meditate for just a few days, then the world machine would stop,How can that not be influential? Seems contradictory.
RE: How psychologists subvert democratic movement - reeay - 10-25-2012
What authority structure doesn't have room for subversion?
RE: How psychologists subvert democratic movement - Patrick - 10-25-2012
(10-25-2012, 12:28 PM)rie Wrote: What authority structure doesn't have room for subversion?
A positively oriented social memory complex ?
RE: How psychologists subvert democratic movement - reeay - 10-25-2012
My issue would be working with people who are mandated to enter into therapy or trying to engage people who would have something to lose (like lose their kids) if they don't enter into treatment. What of free will in the first case?
RE: How psychologists subvert democratic movement - Siren - 10-25-2012
(10-25-2012, 12:26 PM)zenmaster Wrote:(10-25-2012, 12:17 PM)Siren Wrote: No need for "influential" people. If all the Average Joes would but stop doing what they are doing right now and get into a cave/forest/island or other isolated place and meditate for just a few days, then the world machine would stop,How can that not be influential? Seems contradictory.
Of course it would be extremely influential.
I apologize for the seeming contradiction; I thought you meant "influential" as it is generally applied (i.e. professionals, popular figures, critically acclaimed individuals, etc), hence the quotation marks.
I am now ceasing activity on this thread. I do not mean to argue or generate further argumentation. At this point I perceive my activity as infringing and I do not mean to challenge your free-will or be a stumbling block—on the contrary!
I have already spoken more than what was needed.
Au revoir <3
RE: How psychologists subvert democratic movement - Brittany - 10-25-2012
I'm late to this thread, so sorry if everything I say is out of context. I finally read this article, and I wanted to clap with delight that someone could so eloquently arrange my own thought process since I gave the bird to the psychiatry industry and began pursuing alternative methods of treating the chemical imbalance in my brain.
I used to be on a whole cocktail of pills, and had so many diagnosis given to me by so many different shrinks that practically the entire DSM could be represented in my person (I have actually read the DSM, not to mention doing my own extensive research on modern psychology). My favorite was "Oppositional Defiant Disorder", which was tacked on simply because I decided to explain to the panel of psychiatrists reviewing me why their analysis was invalid. I knew more about their own system of learning than they did, they didn't like that, so I was displaying "oppositional behavior." These shrinks honestly expect up front for those they treat to be stupid, unquestioning and completely obedient, and they are licensed to give high doses of psychotrophic drugs to anyone who doesn't conform to that standard.
I was lucky enough to realize what crap the system was before the brain damage the pills gave me became too extensive. At that breaking point I was sitting on the couch all day, drooling, could barely think or talk, and was still trying to somehow maintain a family and a job. Even after quitting the pills, it took years of therapy and retraining my brain to get back everything I lost...to be able to think clearly, speak clearly and interact with others in a meaningful fashion, not to mention using my psychic abilities, which the pills completely shut down to the point I feared they were gone forever. I still have involuntary muscle spasms in my face due to the pills. I consider it my scar from a battle hard fought and hard won against the idea that I was somehow broken for displaying a train of thought that deviated from the norm.
These guys in white coats do not care about you. Yes, there are a few in the industry actively seeking to change it, but in general they are just as brainwashed as those they pump full of drugs. You are a paycheck, and their main goal is to shut you up as quickly as they possibly can, even if it means putting you on tranquilizers. There are a million better ways to work through distortions than poisoning yourself and submitting to those who simply see you as a threat to their hierarchy.
RE: How psychologists subvert democratic movement - zenmaster - 10-25-2012
(10-25-2012, 12:33 PM)Siren Wrote:No, I meant influential as in to influence. People can either directly intend to influence or do it unconsciously. With knowledge and acceptance of a particular domain which desires influence, there would be greater effectiveness of influence. This is the experience which affords opportunity to change conditions. We have infinity if we want it, but sometimes people see what they perceive to be a better way and want to provide that.(10-25-2012, 12:26 PM)zenmaster Wrote:(10-25-2012, 12:17 PM)Siren Wrote: No need for "influential" people. If all the Average Joes would but stop doing what they are doing right now and get into a cave/forest/island or other isolated place and meditate for just a few days, then the world machine would stop,How can that not be influential? Seems contradictory.
Of course it would be extremely influential.
I apologize for the seeming contradiction; I thought you meant "influential" as it is generally applied (i.e. professionals, popular figures, critically acclaimed individuals, etc), hence the quotation marks.
(10-25-2012, 12:39 PM)Brittany Lynn Wrote: I was lucky enough to realize what crap the system was before the brain damage the pills gave me became too extensive.Amazing the extreme conditions people will subject themselves to in order to find acceptable catalyst.
RE: How psychologists subvert democratic movement - Patrick - 10-25-2012
(10-25-2012, 12:40 PM)zenmaster Wrote:(10-25-2012, 12:33 PM)Siren Wrote:(10-25-2012, 12:26 PM)zenmaster Wrote:(10-25-2012, 12:17 PM)Siren Wrote: No need for "influential" people. If all the Average Joes would but stop doing what they are doing right now and get into a cave/forest/island or other isolated place and meditate for just a few days, then the world machine would stop,How can that not be influential? Seems contradictory.
Of course it would be extremely influential.
I apologize for the seeming contradiction; I thought you meant "influential" as it is generally applied (i.e. professionals, popular figures, critically acclaimed individuals, etc), hence the quotation marks.
No, I meant influential as in to influence. People can either directly intend to influence or do it unconsciously. With knowledge and acceptance of a particular domain which desires influence, there would be greater effectiveness of influence. This is the experience which affords opportunity to change conditions. We have infinity if we want it, but sometimes people see what they perceive to be a better way and want to provide that.
Jesus certainly had a lot of influence...
RE: How psychologists subvert democratic movement - zenmaster - 10-25-2012
(10-25-2012, 12:43 PM)Patrick Wrote: Jesus certainly had a lot of influence...People seek guidance. The more honest guidance you're able to offer, the more influential you'll be. Of course, we are given an infinite amount of time to accept guidance.
RE: How psychologists subvert democratic movement - reeay - 10-25-2012
(10-25-2012, 12:39 PM)Brittany Lynn Wrote: These guys in white coats do not care about you. Yes, there are a few in the industry actively seeking to change it, but in general they are just as brainwashed as those they pump full of drugs. You are a paycheck, and their main goal is to shut you up as quickly as they possibly can, even if it means putting you on tranquilizers. There are a million better ways to work through distortions than poisoning yourself and submitting to those who simply see you as a threat to their hierarchy.
And they don't know how else to help people but based on their belief/assumption that drugs will help you (because "mental illness" is supposedly a medical issue, which supposedly is cured by medication). There's not one documented case where drugs cured mental illness. I always thought it was to numb you out without really getting to the core of the issue (temporary fix).
RE: How psychologists subvert democratic movement - Patrick - 10-25-2012
(10-25-2012, 12:48 PM)zenmaster Wrote:(10-25-2012, 12:43 PM)Patrick Wrote: Jesus certainly had a lot of influence...
People seek guidance. The more honest guidance you're able to offer, the more influential you'll be. Of course, we are given an infinite amount of time to accept guidance.
And of course, the whole exercise is done so one can reach awareness that the best guidance one can find is already within the self.
RE: How psychologists subvert democratic movement - zenmaster - 10-25-2012
(10-25-2012, 12:33 PM)rie Wrote: My issue would be working with people who are mandated to enter into therapy or trying to engage people who would have something to lose (like lose their kids) if they don't enter into treatment. What of free will in the first case?This is a good question. I think freedom and free will are generally restricted by habits and institutions. More opportunity to exercise freedom is provided where conditions and their justifications are either self apparent or readily stated for addressing any circumstance. Generally, I'd say it is an engaging dialog and there must be an attempt to reach an understanding with clear acknowledgement of conditions. Only when we know we're operating according to a pattern, or within a framework can we hope to transcend it and we are not upset, discouraged or angered when we all are capable of acknowledging the conditions we set forth.
(10-25-2012, 12:57 PM)Patrick Wrote:That's sort of the point. But back to practical matters, we leverage what others have to offer in addition to what we may provide. Even in "4D" there is a "social contract", although the concerns are not survival related.(10-25-2012, 12:48 PM)zenmaster Wrote:(10-25-2012, 12:43 PM)Patrick Wrote: Jesus certainly had a lot of influence...
People seek guidance. The more honest guidance you're able to offer, the more influential you'll be. Of course, we are given an infinite amount of time to accept guidance.
And of course, the whole exercise is done so one can reach awareness that the best guidance one can find is already within the self.
RE: How psychologists subvert democratic movement - Brittany - 10-25-2012
(10-25-2012, 12:40 PM)zenmaster Wrote:(10-25-2012, 12:39 PM)Brittany Lynn Wrote: I was lucky enough to realize what crap the system was before the brain damage the pills gave me became too extensive.Amazing the extreme conditions people will subject themselves to in order to find acceptable catalyst.
I'm a stubborn old soul. I have to give myself a good kick in the arse from time to time for the lesson to be driven home.
RE: How psychologists subvert democratic movement - neutral333 - 10-25-2012
Psychologists are oft times cold-hearted and overly materialistic like Freud. They lack spirituality and as a result often make problems worse rather than better. Those who follow Jeung are a bit more in tune with spirit.
RE: How psychologists subvert democratic movement - reeay - 10-26-2012
(10-25-2012, 10:14 PM)neutral333 Wrote: Psychologists are oft times cold-hearted and overly materialistic like Freud. They lack spirituality and as a result often make problems worse rather than better. Those who follow Jeung are a bit more in tune with spirit.
Seems like you met a lot of them from how you describe them. Overall, they seem 3D 'human' to me, just like you and me
RE: How psychologists subvert democratic movement - Parsons - 10-26-2012
This has brought interesting catalyst in discussing this article with my wife who has a BA in psychology and working towards her masters. She unfortunately treats the field of work as her religion and does not agree with this article. Oh well, at least she has made some headway in understanding that government and financial institutions are corrupt.
RE: How psychologists subvert democratic movement - reeay - 10-26-2012
(10-26-2012, 01:33 AM)Parsons Wrote: This has brought interesting catalyst in discussing this article with my wife who has a BA in psychology and working towards her masters. She unfortunately treats the field of work as her religion and does not agree with this article. Oh well, at least she has made some headway in understanding that government and financial institutions are corrupt.
Which masters is she getting - counseling, clinical, MFT?
I was just thinking... many students are passionate about what they are studying/doing, it's part of the 'initiation' process or buy in. Understanding of & beliefs around the industry usually change when you're out in the field and really working with people and seeing how you impact other people's lives.
One of the skill sets that students (hopefully) learn is to learn to be reflective & reflexive. Actually, reflexivity is one of the biggest challenges and it's one of the most important skills to build when working in the field. When you're reflective, you become self-aware and you think about what is occurring in self or other or in a therapeutic relationship. When you're reflexive, you're understanding how your reflective thinking impacts others and self. It's like looking at yourself from a higher vantage point and understanding your own belief system and how you understand the client and client's situation, then understanding how those thoughts and beliefs impact the client and your relationship with the client. You could be reflexive about power and authority. It's a complex way of thinking (we call it meta-cognition or thinking about thinking)... and with experience, it becomes more routine/in-the-moment type thing. That helps to keep personal beliefs and biases of the psychological 'world' in check. What one does with that information depends on the person's experience level and skills, etc.
RE: How psychologists subvert democratic movement - Sagittarius - 10-26-2012
(10-26-2012, 01:56 AM)rie Wrote:(10-26-2012, 01:33 AM)Parsons Wrote: This has brought interesting catalyst in discussing this article with my wife who has a BA in psychology and working towards her masters. She unfortunately treats the field of work as her religion and does not agree with this article. Oh well, at least she has made some headway in understanding that government and financial institutions are corrupt.
Which masters is she getting - counseling, clinical, MFT?
I was just thinking... many students are passionate about what they are studying/doing, it's part of the 'initiation' process or buy in. Understanding of & beliefs around the industry usually change when you're out in the field and really working with people and seeing how you impact other people's lives.
One of the skill sets that students (hopefully) learn is to learn to be reflective & reflexive. Actually, reflexivity is one of the biggest challenges and it's one of the most important skills to build when working in the field. When you're reflective, you become self-aware and you think about what is occurring in self or other or in a therapeutic relationship. When you're reflexive, you're understanding how your reflective thinking impacts others and self. It's like looking at yourself from a higher vantage point and understanding your own belief system and how you understand the client and client's situation, then understanding how those thoughts and beliefs impact the client and your relationship with the client. You could be reflexive about power and authority. It's a complex way of thinking (we call it meta-cognition or thinking about thinking)... and with experience, it becomes more routine/in-the-moment type thing. That helps to keep personal beliefs and biases of the psychological 'world' in check. What one does with that information depends on the person's experience level and skills, etc.
Any advice for someone who is starting psychology at Uni next year?
RE: How psychologists subvert democratic movement - Cyan - 10-26-2012
(10-26-2012, 07:14 AM)Sagittarius Wrote:(10-26-2012, 01:56 AM)rie Wrote:(10-26-2012, 01:33 AM)Parsons Wrote: This has brought interesting catalyst in discussing this article with my wife who has a BA in psychology and working towards her masters. She unfortunately treats the field of work as her religion and does not agree with this article. Oh well, at least she has made some headway in understanding that government and financial institutions are corrupt.
Which masters is she getting - counseling, clinical, MFT?
I was just thinking... many students are passionate about what they are studying/doing, it's part of the 'initiation' process or buy in. Understanding of & beliefs around the industry usually change when you're out in the field and really working with people and seeing how you impact other people's lives.
One of the skill sets that students (hopefully) learn is to learn to be reflective & reflexive. Actually, reflexivity is one of the biggest challenges and it's one of the most important skills to build when working in the field. When you're reflective, you become self-aware and you think about what is occurring in self or other or in a therapeutic relationship. When you're reflexive, you're understanding how your reflective thinking impacts others and self. It's like looking at yourself from a higher vantage point and understanding your own belief system and how you understand the client and client's situation, then understanding how those thoughts and beliefs impact the client and your relationship with the client. You could be reflexive about power and authority. It's a complex way of thinking (we call it meta-cognition or thinking about thinking)... and with experience, it becomes more routine/in-the-moment type thing. That helps to keep personal beliefs and biases of the psychological 'world' in check. What one does with that information depends on the person's experience level and skills, etc.
Any advice for someone who is starting psychology at Uni next year?
Dont take any of it too seriously, but consider that for their "soc mem complex" it is the best information so 100% certain that you will learn new ways to see things, even if they are less overall useful as your previous ways
RE: How psychologists subvert democratic movement - Sagittarius - 10-26-2012
(10-26-2012, 07:38 AM)Cyan Wrote:(10-26-2012, 07:14 AM)Sagittarius Wrote:(10-26-2012, 01:56 AM)rie Wrote:(10-26-2012, 01:33 AM)Parsons Wrote: This has brought interesting catalyst in discussing this article with my wife who has a BA in psychology and working towards her masters. She unfortunately treats the field of work as her religion and does not agree with this article. Oh well, at least she has made some headway in understanding that government and financial institutions are corrupt.
Which masters is she getting - counseling, clinical, MFT?
I was just thinking... many students are passionate about what they are studying/doing, it's part of the 'initiation' process or buy in. Understanding of & beliefs around the industry usually change when you're out in the field and really working with people and seeing how you impact other people's lives.
One of the skill sets that students (hopefully) learn is to learn to be reflective & reflexive. Actually, reflexivity is one of the biggest challenges and it's one of the most important skills to build when working in the field. When you're reflective, you become self-aware and you think about what is occurring in self or other or in a therapeutic relationship. When you're reflexive, you're understanding how your reflective thinking impacts others and self. It's like looking at yourself from a higher vantage point and understanding your own belief system and how you understand the client and client's situation, then understanding how those thoughts and beliefs impact the client and your relationship with the client. You could be reflexive about power and authority. It's a complex way of thinking (we call it meta-cognition or thinking about thinking)... and with experience, it becomes more routine/in-the-moment type thing. That helps to keep personal beliefs and biases of the psychological 'world' in check. What one does with that information depends on the person's experience level and skills, etc.
Any advice for someone who is starting psychology at Uni next year?
Dont take any of it too seriously, but consider that for their "soc mem complex" it is the best information so 100% certain that you will learn new ways to see things, even if they are less overall useful as your previous ways
Cheers mate, yeh one of the reasons I decided to do this is to lay a platform for me to express myself in society, no doubt it will be a huge learning experience for me and open up many doors for me to jig my way through into new experiences and circumstances.
Also to help ground me back into society and become an agent for change rather then keeping it all to myself.
I got extreme deja vu the moment I signed up and confirmed the course and I know it was the right decision, it felt like I had already made the decision even before it came to my mind to study psychology.
RE: How psychologists subvert democratic movement - Cyan - 10-26-2012
I studied psych in university so what little i have comes from experience. It will be one of the more interesting places for LOO oriented people. I wish you luck, its a interesting area for sure.
RE: How psychologists subvert democratic movement - reeay - 10-26-2012
(10-26-2012, 07:55 AM)Sagittarius Wrote: Cheers mate, yeh one of the reasons I decided to do this is to lay a platform for me to express myself in society, no doubt it will be a huge learning experience for me and open up many doors for me to jig my way through into new experiences and circumstances.
Also to help ground me back into society and become an agent for change rather then keeping it all to myself.
I got extreme deja vu the moment I signed up and confirmed the course and I know it was the right decision, it felt like I had already made the decision even before it came to my mind to study psychology.
Yes I agree, it's one way to look at the world, it's pretty fascinating. My advice... when you take abnormal psychology, don't diagnose yourself or your friends, or let other people diagnose you lol. Never took psychology classes in university actually, but friends took it and were assigning each other different disorders. I know there's a "syndrome" for that (as a joke of course).
That's awesome you want to become an agent of change! I was actually in the public health field before and we learned/attempted to do a lot about that. The best thing is self knowledge. Really. Asking yourself who you are and what you believe in, and why you believe change needs to happen. Often times it becomes about the "should/could." Lots of "mean green meme" types who believe things should be a certain way and get fanatical about it.
RE: How psychologists subvert democratic movement - Parsons - 10-26-2012
Rie Wrote:Which masters is she getting - counseling, clinical, MFT?
She is going for counseling. She currently just started her practicum a few weeks ago.
RE: How psychologists subvert democratic movement - reeay - 10-26-2012
Don't mean to generalize but counseling psych folks think differently from clinical people. They even tend to dress differently lol. That's great.
RE: How psychologists subvert democratic movement - caycegal - 10-27-2012
(10-26-2012, 01:33 AM)Parsons Wrote: This has brought interesting catalyst in discussing this article with my wife who has a BA in psychology and working towards her masters. She unfortunately treats the field of work as her religion and does not agree with this article. Oh well, at least she has made some headway in understanding that government and financial institutions are corrupt.
One of the fun things about marriages/relationships is they give you a chance to practice loving another while letting that person have different ideas, beliefs and behaviors. I think this can be very healthy as long as both persons are able to grow and are not suffering in the relationship.
I wonder how much psychologists differ from MD's, psychiatrists, ministers, gurus, etc. My experience is that I really can't generalize about any of these fields, and there are people in any field who are vibrating on a higher or lower frequency, and thus allowing more or less room/opportunity for others to grow.
I dropped out of the counseling field probably because of past-life experiences in which I may have used some authority over others to control them -- so in this life I am extremely focused on learning not to attempt to control others. This is the best guess I have been able to make about why I was unable to stay in that field. Also I guess I had learned what I had to learn from it and needed to move on to other fields of learning.
RE: How psychologists subvert democratic movement - zenmaster - 10-27-2012
(10-26-2012, 11:46 AM)rie Wrote: Never took psychology classes in university actually, but friends took it and were assigning each other different disorders. I know there's a "syndrome" for that (as a joke of course).People do it on here too with labels such as STS or STO, as well as all of the new age ideas - crystals, chakras, auras, healing, psychic attacks, meditation - basically anything that is not genuinely understood from first principles and/or from honesty. One has to play with new ideas through projection in order to eventually appreciate their application, esp in a social context.
RE: How psychologists subvert democratic movement - reeay - 10-27-2012
What of 'autism' being related to the indigo child thing? I always wondered about that.
RE: How psychologists subvert democratic movement - zenmaster - 10-28-2012
(10-27-2012, 10:39 PM)rie Wrote: What of 'autism' being related to the indigo child thing? I always wondered about that.I would consider this quote "It is a privilege to be allowed this early an incarnation as there is much experiential catalyst in service to other-selves at this harvesting." I'd imagine that such autistic children would be autistic adults and do not particularly see any remarkable "service to other-selves" aspect in the types of autism which are on the rise. The "indigo children", as they learn the ways of their native density, presumably are helping with the lengthy transition.
RE: How psychologists subvert democratic movement - turtledude23 - 10-29-2012
I was under the impression that psychologists and psychiatrists help alleviate suffering, but clearly that's just a convenient excuse to get people to stop thinking about starting communist revolutions. It's true that people with mental illnesses think more outside the box than healthier people but being contrarian for the sake of being different isn't a good thing. In any case if psychiatrists and psychologists are such a useful brainwashing tool then how come there's a severe shortage of them? Where I live (largest city in my country) you have to wait months to get your first appointment. As for mental hospitals: you can show up the a hospital or mental hospital emergency room, saying you're suicidal, begging for help, and they'll do nothing and send you home because they don't have room.
Thousands of people who are suicidal and who desperately need professional help have to wait for it, and there's all these people thinking the mental health system is some kind of revolving door brainwashing electroshock machine. Do some research first hand and through mainstream books, magazines, newspapers, documentaries and journals first before passing something off as a conspiracy.
RE: How psychologists subvert democratic movement - Parsons - 10-29-2012
Are you simply replying to your surface perceptions of the name of this thread? What are you referring to? I wasn't aware anyone claimed "all psychology is bad". The article in the OP simply makes the case that the most mainstream, lazy version of psychology isn't actually designed to help the individual, but to get them back into the work force. I'm fact, being suicidal for a number of years and seeing 4 professionals in the field I can say they did not help alleviate this dysfunction in the least and I probably wouldn't be typing this message right now had I not fixed myself via philosophy and spirituality. This article bashes psychology designed to return us to the assembly line, not all forms of psychotherapy. For example, from what my wife has read me out of her DSM bible, existential therapy would have greatly benefited alleviating my depression (at the time).