kiwi_trader, You deserve respect as your posts are often insightful and even amusing, but as you freely stated a couple days ago, you entered this discussion without reading the whole thread. So, I suggest you to do it so you can see that before my discussion with JA_LDP, I had already stated that studying psychology is not particularly useful to become a better trader. GS
zdreg, amazing what people believe these days. ref: "Extraordinary Popular Delusions or The Madness of Crowds". This book doesn't yet mention today's psychology cult. Back in those days the psychologists hadn't managed yet to escape from their nut-houses.
The "haven't read what went before" was more rhetorical device than a fact. But I do agree with you But one thing this thread bought me was the realization that a very strong argument against psyching yourself is the "don't doctor/legally represent yourself" and the thought that psyching yourself is probably even more problematic.
Also, let's not forget the "don't masturbate yourself too much or you'll get blind" The doctors I tend to trust the best are those who say "stay as far away as you can from doctors". And I'd also extend this to psychology, if you are speaking in a clinical sense (also because, among other things, many people go to the therapist hoping to get a paid friendship instead of a cure). The problem is, the majority of people are unaware of the differences existing between clinical and non clinical psychology, so that psychologist = therapist. This is not case. However, if one has serious problems, the do-it-yourself can certainly be very dangerous.
inCom i am aware that the following post is offTopic. i apologise in advance. what do you think about classic psychoanalyis, with several sessions a week over years in total? it seems that at present there are different positions on that. someone, who did the whole process by himself, said he would not do it again. not because it was ot interesting, but because it fundamentally changed him in a way he was not sure about if he liked it. i sense about psychoanalysis followers a certain kind of awareness, which is very positive, but there is some kind of very head oriented analytic thinking as well, which seems to stand somehow between them and their emotions. i am a believer in mediation as being a more effective technique with overcoming distress, sorrow, problems in general and a way to meaningful understanding of life as such. having said that i absolutely do think that psychology as such is extremely useful and often necessary.
I'd suggest you tell to that "someone" that if he doesn't like the way he ended up, to change again and be someone else. Not joking. Change can be very fast. For example he could take one of Richard Bandler's seminars and that "someone" will never be the same again, even if he doesn't officially do therapy. Whatever you mean by "classic" psychoanalysis, it has shown that even if it can sometime be effective, it has a very low efficiency. It shouldn't take years and loads of money to help someone solve his/her problems. If you can't do anything in the first session, what will you do in the second? And the third? That's not to say the psychoanalysis is useless. I know and respect a few very skilled analysts but the problem is that analysis is concerned with the why instead of the what, when, how and who. When you go into analysis you enter in a room full of mirrors where everything becomes relative, it can be a very destabilizing experience. It's not needed. Pain is not necessary for one to change. GS
The length of your last post shows that you're probably unsure of your arguments, and you're right. Think about it. You are trying to replace quality with quantity, just as you previously did trying to replace substance with boldness. But quantity alone is rarely a good substitute for quality, just as arrogance alone is not for substance and competence. I have no problem with arrogance per se, it can even be instructive and inspirational, WHEN there is substance behind it. You EARN the right to be arrogant. If those professors really told your GF that psychology is just common sense/useless, well they are wrong. And they are not very good teachers anyway. So it's their opinion or is it yours? Because you replied to another poster saying "that was my opinion and he couldn't accept it". Now you're saying it's theirs. Whose it is? By the way, a high school questionnaire doesn't even compare to a university exam, at least in my country. There is no way a student could pass an university exam here by "common sense" alone. Also, many exams are still written AND oral. "the average joe does not have much common sense" This statement is clearly and plainly contradictory. "Common" sense means pretty much everyone has it. So how can't the average Joe have it? However, I don't think you're a "punk" college boy. You're still a boy and I'm ok with that. If I'd think you were a punk I'd say that to you but you don't come across as such, so don't behave as one and be more precise in your statements. I see that you worked with problematic children and that's honorable. I suppose you put effort and dedication in it and got results. Would you feel ok if someone came to you and say "Anyway, what you're doing is useless"? So just say "ok maybe I was wrong" and everything will be fine. GS