The Psychology Thread

Hold on now.

There is a great, vast difference between what is basically a scam, and what is real psychology. Psychologists have tried for many decades to be taken as serious scientists and denigrating Spiritual Psychology simply because of its title is a particularly unhelpful thing in that aspect.

If you do a study which compares the behaviors of people of certain religion, for example, let's say you want to compare what values seem to be more important for people of Catholic religion over those of Buddhist religion, and do so in a manner subject to all rigorous scientific methods, then you are doing ''Spiritual Psychology".

This is real fuckin' science.

Spiritual Psychology, I would argue, is far more important than you give it credit for. If your client is a 75 year old woman in a social risk area that, for her whole life, has been fed religious sentiments and she is struggling with depression, her entire mentality and personal structure would be incredibly religiously oriented. Wouldn't having a perspective on how religion affects people and how can we hold on to this religion as a tool to improve people's lives be something worth being the object of study?

No. "YOU NEED TEH GOD 2 BE HAPPY!!!!!11! TEH SCIENZ SES" is not "Spiritual Psychology". That is Spiritual "psychology" in the same sense that Biological "psychology" is saying "Wymynz r have teh smaller brains and are dumber than men!!1!!1"

edited 26th Sep '14 8:51:58 AM by Aszur

Theological psychology, philosophical psychology or social philosophy? Why didn't you say so, then? <confused>

"Spiritual psychology" usually means "auras, crystals and tea leaves" where I'm from. <_<

edited 26th Sep '14 8:54:46 AM by Euodiachloris

Because we are talking specifically about APA's division 36. And sure, because, again, "psychology" is a highly bastardized term.

I linked it on my previous posts.

edited 26th Sep '14 8:55:05 AM by Aszur

Nah, you're doing religious studies.

edited 26th Sep '14 8:54:44 AM by Gabrael

Not really.

Psychology tries to predict and study human behavior. Knowing what values are people guided by can help us understand life choices and decisions of everyday lives, as well as (depending to what theory you subscribe to) what thoughts, motivations or learned behaviors guide their everyday actions.

Spiritual Psychology takes one angle to study and elaborate upon.

That's a load of bunk: if it's not philosophy or theology already, what's the point of the "spiritual" stupidity?

Bingo. "Psychology" is the study of the mind... which doesn't necessarily mean "people", but does imply "with tools most in the field agree are useful to the field" aka "empirically". <_< Philosophy and theology do similar things... but, using other tools.

edited 26th Sep '14 9:02:46 AM by Euodiachloris

That's exactly what we do except we also add in the study of how these values and perspectives are expressed.

It's just a name that easily encompasses the interests of humans in those terms. For example, while Atheism is not a religion, it is an expression of spirituality. You can be spiritual, but not religious.

Don't get so held up in a single name. And no. Sorry but the focus of Psychology is behaviors, more than anything. Why do you think the DSM and hecll, the entire line of behavioral lists focuses on that? Wilhelm Wundt's experiments, what is considered as the very first exercise in psychology as a science, was based on gestalt-like experiments based on perception, which is a human function of the brain that is externalized via our behavior.

Again, since there is no sort of copyright on the name "psychology" or because media has sensationalized it to such an easy, trivial thing, people can slap the name "Psychology" on anything (Crystals. Massages. Blankets. 'Therapeutic Spa'. Etc) the exact same way I can call Snake oil or homeopathy "Medicine".

And who is "We"?

Religious Studies Scholars.

Well, it depends on what sort of psychologist is going to grab or do with the study of the values. (As an example)

A clinical psychologist is going to try and determine which values help which states of mind, thought and behaviors that foment a healthy psychological state (For example, a clinical psychologist may arrive at the conclusion that the Religion of Butt promotes nymphomaniac and fetishistic tendencies and could develop a program or information for other psychologists to understand the Butt Fanatics better)

An Organizational Psychologist would grab it to compare just how much can these values facilitate the job of certain areas, to know if maybe a person of that religion could do good as that position. For example, a member of the Church of OCD, might make a good accountant.

A Spiritual Psychologist is going to study the behaviors, thought processes and such of religions. Unlike religious studies though they won't care much about the history, the source, the political implications, or if it is a Matriarchal oriented religion, or Patriarchal, or if it is monotheistic, or polytheistic. It is simply centered exclusively on "How does this religion affect your thinking and behavior"?. So they might overlap, but they are not the same.

edited 26th Sep '14 9:23:27 AM by Aszur

... OR, you know... "philosophy". <_<

Yeah, we do that. Like I study what makes someone use religion for terrorism, their history, their mentality and perspectives, if they have mental illness or not, their politics, their culture, their ethos, and any contributing factors. That means I normally have to look into the same thing just for their religion and country as well.

For example, my undergrad work was on the growing suicide bomber population being recruited from the Aceh Province in Indonesia. My area of emphasis was Southeast Asia and the Middle East.

My graduate research was on the philosophical and ethical implications and impact of the Book of Job.

I've also done work in modern American Christian terrorists, translating original documents and how those translations were intentionally misused over time, some pretty interesting things.

That's just my field. I have colleagues who study religion and pop culture, secular religion such as veganism or any other secular ethos taken to a religious extreme, the cultural evolution of religion, etc.

Yep. You guys are just raining in on our turf.

Well. When Philosophy starts using Alphas of Cronbach, sure. Why not. They are one and the same.

Uhm. Religious studies as I said, encompass a much more integral study which involves just what you said along with many more factors. A psychologist is not quite the person that dedicates themselves making a correlation between The Book of Job, and terrorism, but simply the behavioral circumstances that affect people, or more specifically, a single person in the situation of clinical cases.

edited 26th Sep '14 9:45:06 AM by Aszur

Technically, I think a philosophy of spirituality would study the logic behind spiritual beliefs, and a science of spirituality would investigate the underlying cognitive, social and environmental influences on spiritual beliefs and behaviors.

May I remind you that, technically, science is still a philosophical tool? It was developed by philosophy for philosophy. So, philosophy is more than entitled to take whatever science finds, and to use it to think about what other questions to come up with.

Just as scientists are entitled to yoink any of the good questions from the hands of philosophers and go poking things to find more answers.

It's a two-way street and always has been. But, for psychology to go back to philosophy and theology to try taking their things and relabling them is a bit like a kid leaving home... and taking Dad's stuff, calling it "mine" and trying to sell it: because, reasons. <_<

edited 26th Sep '14 6:35:34 PM by Euodiachloris

In the same sense that English is still Indo-European, I suppose.

I know it's only been a couple of days, but have you had a chance to read either of them, yet? I'm curious to know what you think of them.

There's a lot of that going about.

@ Gabe:

There's quite a few examples of that on this Forum...

@Jones - No, I haven't got around reading it just yet. I really should. XD

Also, what do you mean by that? Are you saying that there are many people who are interested in it, or that it's an interesting topic, both, or something else? Just trying to make sure.

Also, a question for Jones or anyone who has experience with PTSD.

In media, is there any case where the portrayals of PTSD, or lack thereof, in media annoys you?

Most PTSD portrayals I've seen have been soldiers. While that's not bad, I would like to see a few civilian cases.

Regardless I would like people to stop implying that anyone with PTSD is just some ticking time bomb waiting to go off and kill everyone around them. Yes, some with PTSD can be dangerous in specific circumstances. But more likely you're going to see them break down in a panic attack or shut down into zombie mode then just roid rage and frenzy everyone.

Less sensational, over the top and more human if that makes sense. I would also like people to see that there are successful cases where you can get better. Or at least you can learn to cope better.

My counselor described PTSD kinda like cancer. You can be in remission, or you can remove it outright. It all just depends on your case and how well you stick to a program. But you have to be diligent and consistent for those to even be options.

I would consider myself in remission. Ask me in five years and I hope to be fully recovered.

Sorry, D Roy, I was just joking. I've been a little obsessed with the subject myself, of late.

Media-wise...well, I sort of give old Flippy here a pass because he's really a parody of Rambo, but given that he does, albeit as a parody, portray a real condition I'd really like to see the guys at Happy Tree Friends do a Very Special Episode, as some of the comments I've seen relating to his episodes suggest that a great many people think that actually is what it's like.

I quite like how it's portrayed in Airplane! because that's actually closer to how it is for me, and it makes me laugh.

But yeah, it hasn't turned me into an unstoppable killing machine who occasionaly stops to look wistfully into the distance and shed a manly tear; I'm more likely to be found slumped against the wall, staring into space and muttering 'it's all my fault' over and over again or curled up sobbing on the floor with my hands over my ears.

I have had a few incidents where I've had to fight really, really hard not to become a one-man historical reenactment society. When it gets really bad I can actually feel my rifle and all my kit again and I can see my guys, I can hear their voices. Things like walking over certain kinds of ground, smelling a certain kind of tobacco that one guy liked or hearing certain types of aircraft engine can cause that. I don't think I'd be dangerous, even if I did go all Sealed Knot, though, as nobody is going mortar the shit out of the Post Office on my say-so these days.

Mercifully, I never get flashbacks to what gave me PTSD to begin with. I think I was too shocked and dissociated even at the time to really be able to find myself back in the moment.

If PTSD were cancer I think I'm at the stage where the doctor says 'so...if there's anything you've always wanted to do, you should probably go and do it...unless it's reading a long book. I'd give that a miss.'

edited 27th Sep '14 1:06:40 AM by InverurieJones

So uh, anyone knows good litterature on the subject of mass education?

Like for instance, the dark art of teaching a lot of adults to stop smoking cigarettes or that eating tiger dick soup won't make them manlier. To be clear, we're not talking about one on one sessions, I mean the whole act of getting a large group to quit an action.

Oh, wow. That's a forest. Sorry: I don't know any particularly recent insect-mashing tomes to point you at. -_-

When it comes to teaching, information and management systems... ow: that's a big area with a lot of guff. <_<

If you narrow it to one thing like drug addiction or something specific that could help.

From the two subjects, cigarrette smoking nad uh...tiger dick soup, I am willing to wager that the subject is related to masculinity. Of which I do not have information, only a referal. Which is in spanish. Though they might have some books they base themselves off...I can check if there is ocnfirmation that is the subject at hand