11 States ban gay marriage

[Guest CronoT]

Ah, still buying psychology as a legitimate science? How quaint.

          -=Mike

How you can ignore purely scientific evidence when it's presented to you with a straight face and still think you can still be credible in your arguements is beyond me.

 

But, hey, as long as you know you're correct, what else matters, right?

[Guest MikeSC]

Ah, still buying psychology as a legitimate science? How quaint.

          -=Mike

How you can ignore purely scientific evidence when it's presented to you with a straight face and still think you can still be credible in your arguements is beyond me.

 

But, hey, as long as you know you're correct, what else matters, right?

And you're going to tell me that "sexual addiction" frickin' exists? You're going to tell me that half of the syndromes exist?

 

Give me a break.

 

You mistake psychological definitions as "scientific proof". When you can have three psychologists talk to anybody and come up with completely different diagnoses should indicate the utter lack of science involved.

-=Mike

[Guest Agent of Oblivion]

bipolar and gay are two different things. I don't see the correlation.

[Guest Loss]

I only mentioned it because of him discrediting psychology as something particularly useful or scientific.

[Guest MikeSC]

I only mentioned it because of him discrediting psychology as something particularly useful or scientific.

It by and large isn't. I do buy chemical imbalances and the like --- I do not begin to buy most of the "syndromes" involved.

-=Mike

[Guest Agent of Oblivion]

A syndrome technically is just a way of noting a series of symptoms. That's not the same as a disease, I don't think.

[Guest MikeSC]

A syndrome technically is just a way of noting a series of symptoms. That's not the same as a disease, I don't think.

I'm referring to such things as the assorted "addictions" out there.

-=Mike

[Guest Loss]

The idea of someone actually being a sex addict does seem farfetched, but hey, if researchers with more education than me can find that it does exist, then maybe it's worth investigating before writing it off just because it seems ridiculous. I'm hesitant to assume you're saying more than I think you're saying, so I'll stop here.

[Guest MikeSC]

The idea of someone actually being a sex addict does seem farfetched, but hey, if researchers with more education than me can find that it does exist, then maybe it's worth investigating before writing it off just because it seems ridiculous. I'm hesitant to assume you're saying more than I think you're saying, so I'll stop here.

They're referring to it as a "disease" with zero evidence behind it. Sluttiness is not a disease --- it's moral weakness.

-=Mike

[Guest Agent of Oblivion]

Addiction is based in chemicals though..everything is with the brain. Certain substances like drugs or actions like sex stimulate the release of all the feelgood chemicals in your brain. That's what people get addicted to. A response more than a stimulus. You are right however in saying that one can will themselves not to be self-destructive. With some folks, this requires a doctor, and since a doctor gets involved and money changes hands, they've got to call it a disease.

[Guest MikeSC]

Addiction is based in chemicals though..everything is with the brain. Certain substances like drugs or actions like sex stimulate the release of all the feelgood chemicals in your brain. That's what people get addicted to. A response more than a stimulus. You are right however in saying that one can will themselves not to be self-destructive. With some folks, this requires a doctor, and since a doctor gets involved and money changes hands, they've got to call it a disease.

However, I do doubt that they can actually prove that there is any of that sort of thing with many "Addictions".

-=Mike

[Edwin MacPhisto 0]

Addiction is based in chemicals though..everything is with the brain. Certain substances like drugs or actions like sex stimulate the release of all the feelgood chemicals in your brain. That's what people get addicted to. A response more than a stimulus. You are right however in saying that one can will themselves not to be self-destructive. With some folks, this requires a doctor, and since a doctor gets involved and money changes hands, they've got to call it a disease.

However, I do doubt that they can actually prove that there is any of that sort of thing with many "Addictions".

-=Mike

That doubt is rather silly. Any modest amount of time spent in a University psychology department and with a bit of research will in fact show you that it's exactly the case.

 

Psychiatry's merits--certainly the prescription aspects--are still up for debate. Psychology, however, is quite different. The study of the mind and its relation to physiological condition is pretty well substantiated at this point. You can call it bullshit if it's that important to you, but don't conflate the guy who gives you a fat wad of Paxil with the people who are still figuring out how the human mind works.

[Guest MikeSC]

Addiction is based in chemicals though..everything is with the brain. Certain substances like drugs or actions like sex stimulate the release of all the feelgood chemicals in your brain. That's what people get addicted to. A response more than a stimulus. You are right however in saying that one can will themselves not to be self-destructive. With some folks, this requires a doctor, and since a doctor gets involved and money changes hands, they've got to call it a disease.

However, I do doubt that they can actually prove that there is any of that sort of thing with many "Addictions".

-=Mike

That doubt is rather silly. Any modest amount of time spent in a University psychology department and with a bit of research will in fact show you that it's exactly the case.

 

Psychiatry's merits--certainly the prescription aspects--are still up for debate. Psychology, however, is quite different. The study of the mind and its relation to physiological condition is pretty well substantiated at this point. You can call it bullshit if it's that important to you, but don't conflate the guy who gives you a fat wad of Paxil with the people who are still figuring out how the human mind works.

It is not a science. Psychology has become a pursuit of explaining away poor behavior with scientific-sounding terminology. The ability to mold "evidence" to back up any assertion a psychologist has is undeniable.

 

Again, when three psychologists can come up with three different diagnoses for the identical symptom indicates an utter lack of actual scientific worth.

-=Mike

[Guest Agent of Oblivion]

I'm almost afraid to ask, but where do you keep pulling that example from?

[Guest MikeSC]

I'm almost afraid to ask, but where do you keep pulling that example from?

The example is common knowledge. Having worked in psych hospitals as I have in the past shows just how horribly inexact the diagnoses are.

-=Mike

[Guest Salacious Crumb]

I have to admit that I've lost all faith in psychology over the years. It's become a lot like a magic act. A lot of smoke and mirrors and you're never really sure what's going on.

 

It seems to be just an excuse anymore for parents to drug up their kids so they can ignore them and then to later find some scapegoat if their bad parenting results in the death of their kid.

[Guest Loss]

Which would be a criticism of psychiatry, as Edwin says. Psychology is merely the study of the brain. That's science. The whole therapy/psychiatry thing has nothing to do with that.

[Guest MikeSC]

Which would be a criticism of psychiatry, as Edwin says. Psychology is merely the study of the brain. That's science. The whole therapy/psychiatry thing has nothing to do with that.

The problem, though, is that the scientists will use the "science" to get the results they want. There might be science behind it --- but the hucksters bastardize it so much that the science is lost. Especially since psychology has a nasty habit of being rather difficult to peer review or to replicate the results.

 

For example, how many people STILL cite the Kinsey Report as being anything useful in the study of human sexuality --- in spite of it being one of the most fundamentally flawed and borderline useless studies in recent history.

-=Mike

[Edwin MacPhisto 0]

Especially since psychology has a nasty habit of being rather difficult to peer review or to replicate the results.

What psychology have you been looking at? Psychology is probably the most reviewed discipline in current science; its experiments and data gathering methods are deeply documented and easily replicated. Every major American university with a sizable psychology department (read: most of them) devotes a significant chunk of its undergrad research hours to replicating and evaluating prominent or controversial studies.

[Guest SP-1]

No, because there are some instances where divorce is biblically sound and justified. Adultery, for instance. There are no such instances for homosexuality. It's not the same thing.

 

Okay, would you support an amendment to ban divorce in all cases except for adultery? I should also mention that the Catholic church condones divorce under absolutely no circumstances.

Then the Church should reorganize their hermeneutical practices.

 

The rest I'll get to in a bit.