261–270 of 291 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It does not need to be fraudulent, it is enough that it states facts as scientific when they have not been proven.
This article is naming “fraudster of the year.” I think they should show evidence of fraud in this case.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have a friend who's tremendously into astrology. After years of arguments etc I had a moment of enlightment when I realized she practically uses it more as descriptive model rather than predictive source of truth. I. E. She used classifications for personal shorthand on how she thinks about people. From that perspective, there's a sense where a summarizing framework is beneficial. Almost every high level executive…
> Almost every high level executive I met that's actually genuinely good with people, subscribes strongly and uses a personality model - whether it's the Disc model or four quadrants or whatever. I would say my anectdata is completely opposite after working in an organization that based its management almost exclusively on disc. The model allowed managers to completely ignore the vast majority of people issues ("ah,…
I personally did like the Enneagram personality types. It made me realize how I had a totally different way of looking at the world. It's probably a better model than Disc, because it does include healthy and unhealthy levels, which is always extremely important if you want to understand people in general.
I think management applying any kind of model in such a simplistic model is just setting them up for failure. The right kind of thinking would probably have been: "those two are butting heads; let's find out why". The reason for butting heads is not that they have a D in their profile, it's just a correlation.
> He started by placing Freud and Jung as the grounders of modern psychology, a distinction that even a someone who has studied a four-week course in the area will know is incorrect. The subject has developed greatly since the time of Freud, Jung and comic book author, Marston. The author's resistance against Freud and Jung's contributions is... myopic?
The importance of Freud and Jung to applicable psychology in the modern era is vastly overblown.
Also: any “love languages” and Enneagram numbers. It’s really astounding how much these frauds impact relationships and organizations.
> He started by placing Freud and Jung as the grounders of modern psychology, a distinction that even a someone who has studied a four-week course in the area will know is incorrect. The subject has developed greatly since the time of Freud, Jung and comic book author, Marston. The author's resistance against Freud and Jung's contributions is... myopic?
Ways to categorize other people's personalities, such as Myers-Briggs, Swedish Colors, The Zodiac, McCarthyism, devils advocacy, racial profiling, Stockholm Syndrome, and hero worship have always been popular. Why? Because people need ways to feel like they understand and can predict other people's behavior. Why? I don't know. It's just something I've observed. Would you agree, and if so, why do you think that is?
I've never cared for those theoretical models, I prefer using empirical models when it comes to humans.
But the models aren't valid e.g. astrology.
Does that matter?
It seems not really! Many folks still swear by astrology.
How can that work? In mainstream science, a bad heuristic is useless and fades to oblivion or ridicule.
But society is not science. When people use astrology or racism or any other inaccurate heuristic to anchor their beliefs, they create for themselves a role in society, and relationships with their community that are self-fulfilling.
Think everyone is out to get you? Treat them that way, and they'll think you're weird - someone to be avoided and not trusted.
Think tall people are attractive and short people are ugly? That makes you much more likely to partner with a tall person.
Think everyone deserves a smile first thing in the morning? People are going to smile back, and seek you out at the water cooler.
Think everyone deserves to be heard? People are going to talk to you.
Think black people, or brown people, or pink people, or white people, or tan people, or purple people are not worth listening to? You're going to miss out on their stories, food, culture, friendship, companionship and wisdom.
Society is a laboratory. It's also a mirror.
I've lost the thought around this part: > For example, consider a person who says, “now I understand why I have such negative thoughts, can’t get to sleep, and have difficulty getting going…I’ve got depression.” This person might believe that the explanation of her symptoms is depression, but in fact, the diagnosis of depression is just a categorisation of exactly these symptoms. The diagnosis of depression usually r…
This makes it hard to get out (vicious cycle). Thats why even a psychologist will use medicaments when treating someone with a serious depression.
Also: any “love languages” and Enneagram numbers. It’s really astounding how much these frauds impact relationships and organizations.
Hmm, I found the Enneagram tremendously helpful. Why do you dislike it? I guess people can abuse it really easily, but I feel like it helped me to realize who I am in this world.
It might be useful for introspection ("I identify with feelings this model gives to 'reds' or a '4w3' "), but it's not a scientific or testable prediction about the way people act in the world.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I mean philosophically speaking our entire species is a concern. What drives us can also destroy us. Paradox.
It's called freedom. I don't think anyone would have it any other way.
I'm not suggesting a solution, as I don't have one, and would be extremely sceptical of any proposed solution. Doesn't mean we shouldn't recognize it. "Know thyself" etc.