Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Psychological and psychiatric terms to avoid

frontiersin.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 354 posts

Re: Psychological and psychiatric terms to avoid

#41

Post by yamtaddle »

ebiester wrote: post #23
andsoitis wrote: post #10

What do others here think about casual use of the word "crazy" in a work setting. For instance, "that's a crazy idea" or "they're crazy to think ...."

Regardless of "wokism," it might stop meaning from being transmitted to those who do find the term problematic. Absurd or ridiculous both capture the same meaning without losing precision. And at this point, we can look at it more as a function of deprecated terminology - people don't listen to you and think you're a bad person if you use said terminology, they just think you're old. However, to be clear, this is off…

Worrying about something as mild as "crazy" is really, really niche. Maybe that'll change, but for 99% or more of the not-terminally-online crowd, nobody thinks a thing of it today. Even more so outside the US.

I, for one, am overall skeptical that being very concerned about people using any term relating to a human malady or misfortune figuratively is a trend that will continue to flourish even to the extent that it has so far.

Re: Psychological and psychiatric terms to avoid

#42

Post by waprin »

photochemsyn wrote: post #7

Looking at the headline, one might think this is another tedious guide to what (arguably) constitutes politically correct language in modern society (case example: "use 'unhoused' in favor of 'homeless'"), but it's actually a collection of well-researched and documented examples of misuse of technical terms. For example: > " Chemical imbalance . Thanks in part to the success of direct-to-consumer marketing campaigns…

I had the same reaction.

The phrase "chemical imbalance" can't die soon enough. I've met some very smart people who were misled into thinking there's much more scientific evidence than exists that there's some innate brain chemistry that's linked to mental illness. In general, people overestimate how much of psychiatry is first-principles instead of black box statistical conjecture. The first huge hint that there's no simplistic chemical imbalance explanation is they don't measure any brain chemicals when they do psychiatric diagnosis.

Furthermore, when people discuss "chemical imbalance" they're almost always talking about something innate and unchanging e.g. I'm depressed because of a chemical imbalance, not my lifestyle. When there's actually a ton of evidence that to the extent there's chemistry in your brain, your lifestyle and things like your food diet and information diet play a massive role.

I will recommend this guy in way too many comments here but if you haven't heard of Andrew Huberman, please listen to his podcast, it's been life-changing. He gives tons of lifestyle tips and backs up all his arguments with his decades of experience in neuroscience.

Re: Psychological and psychiatric terms to avoid

#43

Post by hunter2_ »

jrm4 wrote: post #27

If anything, I find this to be a, perhaps unintentional, damning indictment of psychology and psychiatry in general. If your discipline cannot clearly define things in a reasonably concrete and provable way, such that it is readily apparent to the patients and the public at large, and also such that the language effectively clarifies itself out of necessity, then much of what you do needs to be strongly questioned --…

I think all disciplines could have a damning list like this. For example, in software development, we could say "pull request" is to be avoided in favor of "merge request" (some progress has definitely been made toward this state, but there is more to do).

Re: Psychological and psychiatric terms to avoid

#44

Post by raxxorraxor »

lupire wrote: post #13
photochemsyn wrote: post #7

Looking at the headline, one might think this is another tedious guide to what (arguably) constitutes politically correct language in modern society (case example: "use 'unhoused' in favor of 'homeless'"), but it's actually a collection of well-researched and documented examples of misuse of technical terms. For example: > " Chemical imbalance . Thanks in part to the success of direct-to-consumer marketing campaigns…

I don't see the difference. Both "Politically Correct" and "Psychiatrically Correct" are addressing the same concern of misconceptions due to inaccurate or misleading language. You can be houseless but not homeless, and still need help with your housing.

No, political correct is most often the opposite. It tries to obfuscate. Certainly not gain precision.

Re: Psychological and psychiatric terms to avoid

#45

Post by MichaelCollins »

> Nevertheless, the attitude-change techniques used by so-called “brainwashers” are no different than standard persuasive methods identified by social psychologists, such as encouraging commitment to goals, manufacturing source credibility, forging an illusion of group consensus, and vivid testimonials

The brainwashing techniques used by various cults, criminal gangs and regimes go far beyond these gentle methods. Particularly, I sure hope social psychologists don't use torture. (Social isolation, food deprivation, and much worse.)

Re: Psychological and psychiatric terms to avoid

#46

Post by 2devnull »

jrm4 wrote: post #27

If anything, I find this to be a, perhaps unintentional, damning indictment of psychology and psychiatry in general. If your discipline cannot clearly define things in a reasonably concrete and provable way, such that it is readily apparent to the patients and the public at large, and also such that the language effectively clarifies itself out of necessity, then much of what you do needs to be strongly questioned --…

It’s more common to hear these terms of misunderstanding in main stream medicine. Psychologists know there isn’t a “chemical imbalance” which “causes depression.” Overworked GPs and others without better training are the ideal audience for this piece.

Re: Psychological and psychiatric terms to avoid

#47

Post by nonrandomstring »

The fine article begins with this rather humble aim that;

> The goal of this article is to promote clear thinking and clear writing among students and teachers of psychological science

How many published papers, or even undergraduate essays contain such simplifications and misunderstandings?

I rather think the piece is aimed elsewhere, to the press, science jornalists, politicians, mid-ranking deciders, mass media, and pundits whose language is awash with this stuff.

Re: Psychological and psychiatric terms to avoid

#48

Post by raxxorraxor »

Karawebnetwork wrote: post #37
ltbarcly3 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not the case. Often the "politically correct" version is not actually more correct, but is replacing some common phrase that is declared obnoxious by some very small unrepresentative minority of people who coincidentally make their living as activists. Yes you can be houseless but not homeless, but you can also be homeless and not houseless. It's an utterly stupid distinction predicated on an intentionally in…

"first, do no harm" includes psychological safety. To use a bold example, there's a difference between telling your client they are "overweight" and telling them they are a "fat ass".

Psychological safety is utterly subjective. There cannot be a general ruleset. Although of course most doctors will not call you a fat ass. Maybe if he knows you more closely...

Re: Psychological and psychiatric terms to avoid

#49

Post by c7b »

jrm4 wrote: post #27

If anything, I find this to be a, perhaps unintentional, damning indictment of psychology and psychiatry in general. If your discipline cannot clearly define things in a reasonably concrete and provable way, such that it is readily apparent to the patients and the public at large, and also such that the language effectively clarifies itself out of necessity, then much of what you do needs to be strongly questioned --…

Frankly, if your standard for a good definition is that it is readily apparent to the public at large, then pretty much every academic discipline will fail your rigour test. Even (or especially) mathematics. Which should make it clear that this is an unfair and useless standard to hold psychology up to.

Re: Psychological and psychiatric terms to avoid

#50

Post by bubblesort »

photochemsyn wrote: post #7

Looking at the headline, one might think this is another tedious guide to what (arguably) constitutes politically correct language in modern society (case example: "use 'unhoused' in favor of 'homeless'"), but it's actually a collection of well-researched and documented examples of misuse of technical terms. For example: > " Chemical imbalance . Thanks in part to the success of direct-to-consumer marketing campaigns…

I agree. I'm going to refer back to this article when debunking pseudo-scientific BS from now on.
Post reply on HN