-
12 votes
-
What cats’ love of boxes and squares can tell us about their visual perception
30 votes -
Health care workers say 'moral injury ' is more accurate than burnout in the face of severe cost cutting
16 votes -
Critical psychiatry and the political backlash against disabilities: a closer look at James Davies
11 votes -
The Homo Economicus as a prototype of a psychopath? A conceptual analysis and implications for business research and teaching.
6 votes -
‘Like a film in my mind’: hyperphantasia and the quest to understand vivid imaginations
18 votes -
Laziness does not exist
46 votes -
The facts and fantasies of dissociation
5 votes -
David Dunning: discoverer of Dunning Kruger effect on overcoming overconfidence
6 votes -
Here are thirteen other explanations for the adolescent mental health crisis. None of them work.
17 votes -
Loneliness can kill, and new research shows middle-aged Americans are particularly vulnerable
31 votes -
Underrated ideas in psychology
7 votes -
Researchers map how the brain regulates emotions
1 vote -
Venting doesn't reduce anger, but doing calming activities does, study finds
44 votes -
The great rewiring: is social media really behind an epidemic of teenage mental illness?
28 votes -
What books helped you deal with the anxiety of life's uncertainties?
Be it fiction or non-fiction, what books did you find helpful for accepting the uncertainties of life? I used the word anxiety in the title, because that's the angle I'm mainly interested in right...
Be it fiction or non-fiction, what books did you find helpful for accepting the uncertainties of life? I used the word anxiety in the title, because that's the angle I'm mainly interested in right now, but in no way I'm just asking about psychology books. All kinds of books are welcome.
29 votes -
Daniel Kahneman, who plumbed the psychology of economics, dies at 90
16 votes -
Daniel Kahneman, renowned psychologist and Nobel prize winner, dies at 90
19 votes -
Psychohistory
9 votes -
How are you using Intermittent Reward? (and why you should think about trying it)
Random Intermittent Reward (known as Variable Ratio Reinforcement Schedule in the field of Applied Behavior Analysis) is a powerful concept from psychology. It states that the increase in...
Random Intermittent Reward (known as Variable Ratio Reinforcement Schedule in the field of Applied Behavior Analysis) is a powerful concept from psychology. It states that the increase in motivation (through dopamine) from the anticipation of a reward is stronger when the reward is not guaranteed. You can see this effect in action with gambling, social media, mobile games (especially loot boxes), and dog training. If you're noticing themes of manipulation or addiction, that's not accidental. In the most typical and visible places that random intermittent rewards are implemented, it reinforces behaviors that are not well aligned with people's values.
It seems like a waste for something this effective to only be used against us, when it could be a huge asset for our personal growth.
I want to know if you have tried using this concept to motivate yourself to do things that are important to you. How did it go? What kind of behaviors were you trying to motivate? What kind of rewards worked or didn't?
Disclaimer: I've been using this concept for a while now to great effect, so I'm building a phone app to make it easier, more effective, and fun to use. You can go to https://tantaluspath.com to see more information and sign up to get notified when the app is available.
21 votes -
The Dunning-Kruger effect is autocorrelation
30 votes -
The rise and fall of the False Memory Syndrome Foundation (2020)
5 votes -
Join me on the path to Twilightenment
27 votes -
How parents' trauma leaves biological traces in children
18 votes -
MRI research shows live music makes us more emotional than recordings
21 votes -
Three long-term effects of a "plastic wrap parenting" style
21 votes -
Non-fictional books about getting to know emotions?
Hello, I'm looking for books written by professionals that would further my language and understanding of emotions, in order to connect with my emotions on a deeper level. An example would be...
Hello, I'm looking for books written by professionals that would further my language and understanding of emotions, in order to connect with my emotions on a deeper level. An example would be "Running on Empty: Overcome Your Childhood Emotional Neglect", but it doesn't have to be about neglect. I just want to understand and experience the emotional spectrum better, so any book (written by a mental health professional) that would help with that is good. If possible, I prefer shorter books, around 100-250 pages, but it's not a hard requirement.
21 votes -
Why we can’t build better cities (ft. Not Just Bikes)
13 votes -
Finnish study finds that people from different cultures reported the same bodily sensations when listening to the same songs
7 votes -
Why are there such profound differences in conceptions of masculinity between Denmark and America?
15 votes -
Extreme metal guitar skills linked to intrasexual competition, but not mating success
28 votes -
I have a massive gripe with reductive "politicization" of mental health
Before we start, no, I don't mean "bring politics into" mental health. Politics obviously covers mental health issues, practices, and institutions. However, I've come to realize a certain approach...
Before we start, no, I don't mean "bring politics into" mental health. Politics obviously covers mental health issues, practices, and institutions. However, I've come to realize a certain approach to mental health has taken root in discussions around mental health. This approach is based on the criticism of mental health from an ideological point. It centers on the idea that mental health is treated only as a chemical imbalance in the brain, and that sociopolitical conditions aren't considered. One of the most prominently figures cited for this is Mark Fisher.
“The current ruling ontology denies any possibility of a social causation of mental illness. The chemico-biologization of mental illness is of course strictly commensurate with its depoliticization. Considering mental illness an individual chemico-biological problem has enormous benefits for capitalism. First, it reinforces Capital’s drive towards atomistic individualization (you are sick because of your brain chemistry). Second, it provides an enormously lucrative market in which multinational pharmaceutical companies can peddle their pharmaceuticals (we can cure you with our SSRIs). It goes without saying that all mental illnesses are neurologically instantiated, but this says nothing about their causation. If it is true, for instance, that depression is constituted by low serotonin levels, what still needs to be explained is why particular individuals have low levels of serotonin. This requires a social and political explanation; and the task of repoliticizing mental illness is an urgent one if the left wants to challenge capitalist realism.”
― Mark Fisher, Capitalist Realism: Is There No Alternative?, 2009
This, I think, is true to a degree. Denying the mental or physical results of certain policies benefits the rich. However, this criticism, whether intended by Fisher or not, is often used to reduce psychiatry and psychotherapy to mere, atomized, asocial, apolitical practices.
First of all, this hasn't been true in my case. Sure, I have my criticisms of the procedure and the practitioners, but I've talked about a variety of sociopolitical issues in therapy. I mean, how can you not talk about these issues? There are obviously social patterns in a population, and if they're not bad practitioners, the psychiatrists pick up on them. This doesn't mean that I talked about political theory in my therapy, but among numerous topics, I talked about things like the male gender role, the attached aggression and violence, the effects of emotional repression as a result of traditional roles. I know people who extensively talked in therapy about gender roles, queerphobia, and the associated problems.
Therapy helped me on political issues too. I used to be much more repressed, unable to express my disapproval, unable to handle any conflict. But with the help of psychiatry, I started expressing my opinions, including my disapproval, more and more. This included standing up for myself, and while there are many power structures I can't overcome as an individual, this change helped me better stand up for myself against people who have power over me. It also helps me feel not as much like a piece of shit when I can't, because learning to face my emotions helps me realize I have limits.
But, according to the Fisherian argument I've seen repeated countless times, this isn't what psychiatry does. It just treats you like an asocial animal, which is not true at all. If anything, psychiatry emphasizes, again and again, that humans are social animals, therefore, have social needs, and that not meeting those needs will lead to mental problems. Seriously. Search "humans are social creatures psychiatry" on whatever search engine you use and also on Google Scholar. You'll find, page after page, pop article and scientific article, talking about the importance of this.
The second thing I want to mention is that links between inequality and mental health are an important area of research. You can search for keywords like "socioeconomic status mental health" and "inequality mental health" on Google Scholar to see many articles written about this. You can alternatively replace "socioeconomic status" with "SES" and "mental health" with "mental illness" or a mental disorder of your choosing.
To add further support to my argument, let's look at the textbook "Psychology, Global Edition, 5th Edition" of Pearson, which is a very widely known publisher. It has an entire chapter dedicated to social psychology (Chapter 12). The chapter about psychological disorders, Chapter 14, has the following listed as one of its learning objectives (emphasis mine): "Compare and contrast behavioral, social cognitive, and biological explanations for depression and other disorders of mood."
Let's also look at WHO's mental disorders page (emphasis mine).
"At any one time, a diverse set of individual, family, community, and structural factors may combine to protect or undermine mental health. Although most people are resilient, people who are exposed to adverse circumstances – including poverty, violence, disability, and inequality – are at higher risk. Protective and risk factors include individual psychological and biological factors, such as emotional skills as well as genetics. Many of the risk and protective factors are influenced through changes in brain structure and/or function."
I think one of the other negative things about this argument is that, it denies the possibility that some people face mental illness not mainly as a result of social issues, but as a result of some biological unluck. I haven't checked it out specifically, but I think mental illnesses aren't necessarily mainly a result of social conditions or trauma. I can't claim this with certainty, but neither can the opposing side. However, my approach leaves a possibility open for people who may be experiencing exactly this. Therefore, without knowing, it doesn't claim that certain experiences can't exist.
Before I finish, I want to say that I don't deny the existence of bad practice. I've heard many stories of bad psychiatrists, and even if I hadn't, it would be unrealistic to think they wouldn't have such a problem, considering the problems in education and funding. However, my point is, it's not realistic to say psychiatry overlooks the social reasons for mental illnesses. There may be problems, but in no way they are a shared, distinctive feature of the field.
And last of all, this may be harsh but I think it needs saying, Mark Fisher fell victim to suicide. He's not exactly an epitome of healthy coping mechanisms, and his criticisms about mental health should be evaluated with that in mind. I often think intellectualization tends to come in the way of mental health for, well, intellectual people.
Edit: The last paragraph was poorly explained. I further elaborated here.
19 votes -
'Americans are fake and the Dutch are rude!': A personal account on their difference in social behavior
54 votes -
Can ‘micro-acts of joy’ make you happier? I tried them for seven days.
11 votes -
"If the role of dysfunctional parenting in psychological disorders was ever fully recognized, the DSM would shrink to the size of a thin pamphlet"
This statement by traumatologist John Briere is quoted in Pete Walker's FAQ on Complex PTSD, a proponent of the unified Trauma model of mental disorders. Dr. Gabor Mate has become popular in...
This statement by traumatologist John Briere is quoted in Pete Walker's FAQ on Complex PTSD, a proponent of the unified Trauma model of mental disorders. Dr. Gabor Mate has become popular in recent years, who similarly claims that (e.g.) "Attention Deficit Disorder is a reversible impairment and a developmental delay, with origins in infancy. It is rooted in multigenerational family stress and in disturbed social conditions in a stressed society." Another famous champion of this theory was Alice Miller. Quote: "Experience has taught us that we have only one enduring weapon in our struggle against mental illness: the emotional discovery and emotional acceptance of the truth in the individual and unique history of our childhood." A more recent bestseller around this topic is Philippa Perry's "The Book You Wish Your Parents Had Read" (Guardian review).
The various personality disorders from ICD-10 were replaced by a single personality disorder diagnosis in ICD-11, and they finally added Complex PTSD. The director of the largest psychiatric clinic in Germany is in favor of removing the category of "
mentalpersonality disorders" altogether (German article).Studies seem to confirm strong links between "adverse childhood experiences" and various forms of mental illnesses. To pick just one of the many I found: "Compared to children with no Adverse Childhood Experiences, the odds of an ADHD diagnosis were 1.39, 1.92, and 2.72 times higher among children with one, two and three or more ACEs. The ACE most strongly associated with the odds of ADHD was having lived with someone with mental illness closely followed by parent/guardian incarceration." (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2020.104884)
I'm interested in hearing your takes, and potentially this thread can serve as a collection of quotes and links around this theory.
38 votes -
Why are antidepressants so popular in Iceland? | Mindset
6 votes -
Why we crave – The neuroscientific picture of addiction overlooks the psychological and social factors that make cravings so hard to resist
15 votes -
What the Prisoner's Dilemma reveals about life, the Universe, and everything
32 votes -
Sludge videos are taking over social media and people’s mind
16 votes -
Frantz Fanon’s enduring legacy – The post-colonial thinker’s seminal book, “The Wretched of the Earth,” described political oppression in psychological terms
11 votes -
There are two types of airport people : Some travelers love being late [2019]
22 votes -
Studies suggest that relying on will power is hopeless [to eliminate bad habits]. Instead, we must find strategies that don’t require us to be strong.
46 votes -
You've just been fucked by psyops; the death of the internet
20 votes -
The case of Donnie Moss
6 votes -
Life begins at forty: The biological and cultural roots of the midlife crisis
10 votes -
The bodily indignities of the space life
21 votes -
Loved, yet lonely - You might have the unconditional love of family and friends and yet feel deep loneliness. Can philosophy explain why?
24 votes -
The happiest man in the world
14 votes -
Intro to Carl Jung and Jungian Psychoanalytics
Does anyone have any short-to-medium length content that clearly introduces the ideas of Jung? I don't mind it being dense philosophically, but there's sort of this deliberate obfuscation of ideas...
Does anyone have any short-to-medium length content that clearly introduces the ideas of Jung?
I don't mind it being dense philosophically, but there's sort of this deliberate obfuscation of ideas that Jungian content creators utilize towards some end.
In philosophy, specific terms and jargon is necessary to ensure philosophical precision of the idea being presented. If one looks up said jargon, they can gain context about what's being communicated.
As far as Jung content online goes, there's a lot of jargon being used, but I'd wager about 50% of it is made up on the fly. When looked up, the term often either doesn't exist, is an adhoc portmanteau of two random terms, or simply doesn't make sense within the context it's used. Why? It seems like they deliberately are obfuscating their ideas for seemingly no reason. Perhaps there's a perceived invulnerability to criticism if your position on basic ideas can't be nailed down?
It seems that Jordan Peterson is the most prominent idea-obfuscator in this tradition, but I understand why he does it; some of his audience likely wouldn't care for the fact that he's likely what they'd describe as an atheist if you were able to pin down the ideas he conveys (e.g., Christ is but one of many manifestations of a Jungian archetype.)
Kinds of content I'm looking for:
- Newb friendly
- Clearly communicates ideas
- Philosophically precise
- Critical, but not polemic (i.e., no "debunking" videos)
- Video/audio/books preferred
Thank you in advance (:
18 votes -
Maths anxiety
12 votes