Any psychologist on this forum?

i like all i read from you so far. reflective quality, yet not necessarily supersmoothcosy.

i completely agree to your points on what one might call therapy"efficiency", though this word might have a quite materialistic flavour. i think one must reflect where classic (meaning more or less freudian) analysis comes from. and
what kind of distortion it was used for. from the limited
cases i heard of i would say that freud himself had mainly
patients with very physical manifestations of their problem.
and that at a time when sexuality for example was an
issue non-accessible but with a lot of time and passive
behavior of the analyst.

but today there are quite different ways and social acceptance
of certain "delicate" topics. so it is first easier to come to
the point (actually for both parts patient and analyst) and
secondly most "problems" are much less "physical". though,
writing this i doubt that i can use "physical" as a real proxy
for "severe", which i somehow imply ...

 

iknowuknow.

 

nice post, cheers to ya punk college boy ;-)

 

Bandler, yeah sure, i'd love to attend one of his seminars... but he is not the only fucked-up individual giving seminars around, why him in particular? u got more good advice like that doc??

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Bandler#Litigation.2C_Prosecution_and_Bankruptcy
"Litigation, Prosecution and Bankruptcy
In 1980 Bandler's company Not Ltd had reported earnings of more than US$800,000 and he and his then wife -- Leslie Cameron-Bandler -- were living an opulent lifestyle. By the end of 1980 Bandler's collaboration with Grinder -- where they lectured, trained and co-authored -- abruptly ended and his wife filed for divorce (after two years of marriage). Leslie Cameron-Bandler was later to report that Bandler was emotionally and physically abusive.[3] In 1983, Not Ltd declared bankruptcy.[4]

In 1986, Bandler was tried and acquitted of first degree murder. [5]

In July of 1996 Bandler filed suit against John Grinder and again in January 1997 against Grinder and numerous prominent members of the NLP community including, Carmen Bostic-St. Clair, Steve and Connirae Andreas. Bandler claimed trademark infringement, intellectual property ownership of NLP, conspiratorial tortious interference and breach of settlement agreement and permanent injunction by Grinder.[6] [7] [8]

In addition to claiming (retrospective) sole ownership of NLP, Bandler claimed "damages against each such defendant in an amount to be proven at trial, but in no event less than [US]$10,000,000.00". The list of defendants included 200 "Does", i.e. empty names to be specified later. [9]

On February 2000 the Superior Court found against Bandler stating that "Bandler has misrepresented to the public, through his licensing agreement and promotional materials, that he is the exclusive owner of all intellectual property rights associated with NLP, and maintains the exclusive authority to determine membership in and certification in the Society of NLP." [10]

Contemporaneous with Bandler's suits in the US Superior Court, Tony Clarkson (of Clarkson Knitting Limited) sought the revocation of Bandler's UK registered trademark "NLP" in the UK High Court. The UK High Court found in favor of Clarkson Knitting Limited and on 11 July 2000 Bandler was made bankrupt. [11]

By the end of 2000 some sort of rapprochement between Bandler and Grinder was achieved when the parties entered a release wherein they inter alia agreed that "they are the co-creators and co-founders of the technology of Neuro-linguistic Programming. Drs. Grinder and Bandler recognize the efforts and contributions of each other in the creation and initial development of NLP." In the same document, "Dr. John Grinder and Dr. Richard Bandler mutually agree to refrain from disparaging each other's efforts, in any fashion, concerning their respective involvement in the field of NeuroLinguistic Programming." ("Release" reproduced as Appendix A of Whispering in the Wind by Grinder and Bostic St Clair (2001))."

 

now if that was not a little, just a very, very little, ...arrogant???
no offense intended (really not), but this invitation is hard to follow ... at least i think so ... but i sense where you are coming from ... so: easy ...

 

just an attempt. people here currently do not disagree a big deal. maybe we all (really including me) try to not escalate on the differences of our point but maybe strengthen more the common ground ... uhhh ... i hope i do not make a fool out of myself now ..

 

btw i realised with many friends that having a degree or not really makes a difference of not for people who have none. i am glad i am having one, so i do not have to think the others are superior and have to somehow defend against them. in fact it really enables me ( think i am honest to myself about that) to see through it and the lack of importance.

in my familiy all have a degree and especially my mother loves this kind of thing. my brother in law is a graphic artist and he has no degree and at the moment does not live from his art, but from some office job he does. now he really thinks, asides of being the only truly creative person around the place, that degrees per se have value. really sad to watch. he is always in defense. all his arguments have the flavor of defense.

give people credit for that. i hope i made myself clear ... no offense to whomever intended here ...

 

I think you need to reread my post. I never said that her professors told her psychology was worthless. I said her advisors told her she should be looking to get an advanced degree to ensure a decent job because there are so many people graduating in psychology.

It is my opinion that the majority of psychology is common sense. No matter what I base my beliefs on, whether that be what a professor says, what I score on a test or what I read. Is that not still my opinion?

I took 4 years of French in high school and 2 semesters in college, and from what I know about European education, one should not compare a European exam to an American exam. My understanding is that a European’s education is much more difficult and respectable. I know they do things a lot differently than here is the U.S. (I’m assuming your profile is correct and you are from Italy).

What exactly am I wrong about? You first said I was wrong when I said, “Psychology is the degree where kids say, "well...if all else fails, I'll just major in psychology." This may not be true in Italy, but it sure is in Michigan. Even my professors joke about it.

Also, you need to get over the fact that I said it was useless. I took that statement back because I was being sarcastic. I do not believe anything is this world is completely useless.

I know you didn’t call me a punk. I added that. That’s why I didn’t include that in the quotations.

With you being a European, and most European’s think Americans are idiots, I would expect you to understand the statement, “Most Americans do not have common sense.” …there I go generalizing again.

 

you used I sixteen times in your post.
some of your paragraphs included I in every sentence.
the market will prove your sense of self importance to be wrong very quickly.

 

central european point: psychology is regarded a not too difficult either. which does not per se say anything about the quality of it. it could just be: you spend less time learning facts but more understanding yourself and your environment. so: easier, yes. but maybe still more worthwhile.