|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Tue Sep 16, 2014 10:38 am
Ah, okay. I can only sympathize w/ your position regarding passion, since I'm asexual, but I know libido bothers many a friend of mine. As far as just the intimacy aspects, though, I can empathize since I'm a romantic asexual (even though I often pretend to be aromantic just for simplicity's sake). It seems all 3 of us are in unideal situations regarding love. If it helps any, Magni recently enlightened me as to a solid way to break down love which may help you to better state your desire in this discussion: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triangular_theory_of_loveMore to Magni, but the question is to anybody. Have you seen and/or like the show "Frasier" (the spinoff of "Cheers")? I've not really mentioned before what got me interested (in the general intellectually curious sense) in the psych field, but that was actually it, oddly enough.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Sep 16, 2014 9:47 pm
I freaking love that theory, and have used it many times in conversations!!!
As for Frasier, yes, I have seen a fair amount. Not sure if it portrayed psychologists in the best light, especially since it was a radio talk show advice person . . . but it was interesting to see some form of intelligence be used in a sitcom.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Sep 16, 2014 11:20 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Sep 17, 2014 6:25 pm
Oh, I don't base anything off of a sitcom. It was just what got me interested in the field 8-10 years ago, b/c many of my religion dismiss the legitimacy of the very concept of psychology/psychiatry (the reasons for which would be a confusing long-winded conversation given differing worldviews and the history of misunderstandings both ways).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Sep 17, 2014 7:51 pm
Yoder Oh, I don't base anything off of a sitcom. It was just what got me interested in the field 8-10 years ago, b/c many of my religion dismiss the legitimacy of the very concept of psychology/psychiatry (the reasons for which would be a confusing long-winded conversation given differing worldviews and the history of misunderstandings both ways).
eek Really? Religious individuals in your circle denounce psychology/psychiatry?!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Sep 17, 2014 10:41 pm
Oh, plenty of them do, and here's a brief rundown:
It stems from their rejection of he secular humanist ideas that they see as the foundation of the entire field. The problem is that, yes, certain modern methods have approaches that take the wrong angle to things from a Christian perspective, but there does exist valid science about the mind that can be incredibly useful. So, though it gets written off wholesale, it is more the practice/treatment aspects that Christians disagree with, not the legitimate basis (laconic: psychiatry = bad; psychology = okay). I can confidently say this due to many aspects of psychology being featured in Christian curriculum under different names (examples: early childhood, childhood, adolescent, and marriage/family courses). Also, Christianity, by necessity, must take the Bible over psych when they disagree (just as must be done w/ any secular authority), which happens fairly often. The Bible has a lot to say about psychology, generally indirectly based off of other types of principles (similar to how the commandments for/against given actions reveal God's character indirectly despite there also being passages that directly reveal God's character).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Sep 18, 2014 4:46 pm
...I think I read your post about twice now and still processing. Maybe from working suddenly today and having a test kinda deep fried my brain extra crispy lol.
Speaking of suddenly working, today I was supposed to do a five-hour orientation. Three hours in, my boss is surprised how fast we were done. I was surprised too. The information is overwhelming. She said I am really a fast learner. This is when I thought I get to go home early.
Boss: SO! Let's put you on the register! 8D
Me: Okay! (WAIT WHAT!?)
Lol.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Sep 18, 2014 6:10 pm
The APA Code of Ethics Section 2.01 - Boundaries of Competence (a) Psychologists provide services, teach and conduct research with populations and in areas only within the boundaries of their competence, based on their education, training, supervised experience, consultation, study or professional experience.
I'm quoting that because after several readings . . . that makes no sense to me my friend. well beyond my area of expertise. I have yet to hear anything religious or anti-religious in my studies except for one thing. A form of psychology was specifically created when a group of professionals had to interact with several officials from the Jewish faith. In order to help them without in any way denouncing or devaluing their beliefs, a form of therapy called Multicultural Psychology was founded. This form is focused on listening to what is valued by the patient and never doing anything to devalue that. Even if the beliefs and understandings of the patient are radically different to the professional, this tenet is made to make sure that the patient is never felt like what matters to them is immaterial.
As it was founded specifically to deal with men (and women) of faith, it is hard for me to understand why a faith would choose to push away psychology or psychiatry. Maybe I am just not getting it . . . confused
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Sep 19, 2014 3:56 pm
Well, a lot of the outright dismissal comes from observance of outdated models, such as Freud. Freud is someone Christianity completely disagrees with.
And the thing is, a lot of Christians won't consider adapting secular wisdom in light of scripture. I do not mean compromising the either; I just mean that the secular world cannot be expected to advance their sciences with faith-based concepts like sin when they do not share the Christian worldview (I'm not getting into intelligent design, but know that I feel it has enough secular merit to deserve consideration by the secular world, so that's not what I'm talking about with the past sentence). Thus, seeing psych makes no mention of sin (instead playing blame game to societal nurture or biological nature), does not support moral absolutes (I know it supports some baseline ethical absolutes), and is relative to current society in many ways, Christians are essentially doomed to reject it while they retain minds that closed off (separation and distinction are Biblical principles, but isolation is not).
As an example of the bias against secular psych, I have never even heard of multicultural psychology, though it does sound promising.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Sep 19, 2014 8:32 pm
Okay, let me start off with one thing . . . Freud was the founder of psychology, but he was also a coke-fiend, and was far from perfect. I respect his contributions to the science in much the same way I appreciate Led Zepplin and Hendrix for what they did to rock/metal. I don't like their work, but understand that without them the genres would be nothing like they are now.
I still feel more than a little lost, but what I get from your posts is that Christian view is based on thought models more than a century old, and the problem of first impressions. I also agree that our job as psychologists is to help work through problems rather than label them as sin. In particular, the idea of original sin doesn't make sense to me. ^_^;;; Not even attempting to be insulting- honest. Dysfunctions can come from all sorts of sources . . . and to be fair, the concept of sin can be a big one. Depending on the devout level of faith a person has, the conflict of sin versus desire or action can be a serious source of trouble.
That said, I also feel compelled to point out that psychology is not about quick fixes or solving everybody's problems. Like a confessor in faith, our job is to help people work through problems in life. We are supplements to life, not meant to be a panacea (cure all). In fact, I would openly welcome anybody in my practice to seek out a trusted member of their faith. Whatever it takes to help the person . . . I would rather have healthy patients than allow my professional pride get in the way.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Sep 19, 2014 9:09 pm
Ruined Horizon Okay, let me start off with one thing . . . Freud was the founder of psychology, but he was also a coke-fiend, and was far from perfect. I respect his contributions to the science in much the same way I appreciate Led Zepplin and Hendrix for what they did to rock/metal. I don't like their work, but understand that without them the genres would be nothing like they are now. I still feel more than a little lost, but what I get from your posts is that Christian view is based on thought models more than a century old, and the problem of first impressions. I also agree that our job as psychologists is to help work through problems rather than label them as sin. In particular, the idea of original sin doesn't make sense to me. ^_^;;; Not even attempting to be insulting- honest. Dysfunctions can come from all sorts of sources . . . and to be fair, the concept of sin can be a big one. Depending on the devout level of faith a person has, the conflict of sin versus desire or action can be a serious source of trouble. That said, I also feel compelled to point out that psychology is not about quick fixes or solving everybody's problems. Like a confessor in faith, our job is to help people work through problems in life. We are supplements to life, not meant to be a panacea (cure all). In fact, I would openly welcome anybody in my practice to seek out a trusted member of their faith. Whatever it takes to help the person . . . I would rather have healthy patients than allow my professional pride get in the way.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Sep 20, 2014 12:04 am
Oh, please don't get me wrong. I understand all of what you said; I was just explaining what most conservative Christians (and even then, my generation is warming to the field) feel about the psych field and why.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Sep 20, 2014 11:24 pm
Wicked Lily Ruined Horizon That said, I also feel compelled to point out that psychology is not about quick fixes or solving everybody's problems. Like a confessor in faith, our job is to help people work through problems in life. We are supplements to life, not meant to be a panacea (cure all). In fact, I would openly welcome anybody in my practice to seek out a trusted member of their faith. Whatever it takes to help the person . . . I would rather have healthy patients than allow my professional pride get in the way.
You are a psych major? May I ask what specialization (if any)? If you need any help, I would be glad to send papers/resources in your direction.
I remember having a friend that was a Pastor at the local Church of the Nazerene. He asked me about how I help people once and I told him much of what I said in the quoted area here. A religious confessor or a psychologist, the point is to say "I can't fix you. I can support you and give you the tools to fix yourself." He and I may not have seen eye to eye on beliefs . . . but I counted him as a friend and kindred spirit in that we wanted to help others. The only reason I use the past tense is because he has passed on. His wife was the preschool teacher to my kids, and I still count her as a friend. Religion and psych do not have to be mutually exclusive.
I fully understand Yoder, I just have trouble wrapping my head around how sitting down and talking through issues could be a bad thing . . . Like the theological discussion we had (that I feel totally bad for letting fade away), it is interesting to have such a differently experienced companion. You have so many bits of knowledge and life that I do not, and yet I count you as an old friend. I value your input, and do not wish to offend at all- even when the ideology you are presenting makes less sense to me than a $3 bill. sweatdrop
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Sep 20, 2014 11:53 pm
Finished sociology and right now taking Developmental Psychology.
My goal is to start a mentoring program for hearing families that received a deaf child. My goal is to be neutral (I am a deaf woman from hearing culture and world and learned about the deaf culture at the age of eighteen) So I can give them pros and cons to which ever the family decide for their child. The reason why I am doing this though is because parents usually just listens to doctors and implant their child without search because the doctors give them the notion that we are 'broken' and we need to be 'fixed'
This mentoring program. I heard it works really well. It helps educate their parents and be ready to expect what they may expect. Whatever they decide, we always recommend to learn sign language for communication. My parents never learned sign language and therefore, we never really communicated. Sure I can hear with my cochlear implants but it can only do so much. I do wish my parents would learn sign language for easy communication instead of trying to communicate and be frustrated and end up me feeling isolated at each family gatherings.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Sep 21, 2014 8:45 pm
developmental psych?! I just squeed a little.
http://psychology.about.com/library/bl_psychosocial_summary.htm
I love Erikson's developmental theory as it can apply to both lifetime and portions of a person's life. For instance, moving to a new area goes through similar stages.
As I understand it, psych is all about helping people. Not telling them they are broken, not saying you have to do A or B (with certain exceptions like hurting others or the self). I applaud your ideals, and sincerely hope that you get there. If nothing else Blissy, you got one professional in your corner. 3nodding
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
