friendica (DFRN) - Link to source
The media in this post is not displayed to visitors. To view it, please log in.
#trom #tromsite #psychology #depression #adhd #psychiatry #mentalillness #mentaldisorders

reshared this

in reply to Tio

diaspora - Link to source

-jonny-

I think the overall congress was about some "secret space program", but this talk had really nothing to do with it. It is about the invention of mental illness, as described in the DSM, for the purpose of profit making and control. Furthermore, it is about the denial of paranormal phenomena by mainstream psychology and how they are really trying to medicate people out of it. It is a fascinating talk if you are able to keep an open mind...
in reply to -jonny-

friendica (DFRN) - Link to source

Tio

it is about the denial of paranormal phenomena by mainstream psychology

I will have to give this a pass then. If there is anything para-normal it is either "we do not know what this is" and leave it as that, or it can be explained with science and thus is nothing "para" about it.

What I am talking about, and what psychologists and psychiatrists are recommending is to be more honest about the labeling of human behavior in this simplistic DSM way, and focus on what makes people struggle mentally. Sure may be that the pharmaceutical industry is enjoying the livestock approach where they sell pills for these mental disorders and they push for the labeling, but the focus is on the positive side to understand that these behaviors are complex and need help more than just some pills.

It is sad and terrible to combine this valid criticism of the current diagnosis of mental disorders with "paranormal" and all sort of conspiracies.

in reply to Tio

diaspora - Link to source

Amina Jojo

Psychic phenomena tend to be dismissed, but only by today's western culture.

That psychiatric medicine "medicate[s] people out of it" fits with what a friend once told me, namely that the medicine he had to take closed his "third eye".

The Power Threat Meaning Framework makes sense. But as long as therapies are covered by insurances one will need at least an assessment by the doctor that one has to be treated.

in reply to Tio

diaspora - Link to source

Amina Jojo

@Tio
I too don't think this is deliberate. If you ask me it's just an unconscious outcome of a misled approach to what is known as "mental disorders". Mental processes are described as electricity in the brain, fuelled by neurotransmitters. That's one reason why mental illnesses are treated with pharmaceuticals.

Psychic Phenomena can be validated, and have been for a long time. Take for example Rupert Sheldrake's experiments with phone calls, a more recent validation which you can read about here: sheldrake.org/research/telepat… I must add that I haven't read this particular text, but know about these experiments from one of Sheldrake's books.

The question why it is dismissed remains open. I think one reason is that it seems to contradict today's common sense. Belief systems are tough. Research in this field is a reputation killer.

A Filmed Experiment on Telephone Telepathy with the Nolan Sisters

Watch the Video Journal of the Society for Psychical Research 68, 168-172 by Rupert Sheldrake, Hugo Godwin and Simon Rockell PDF Introduction Apparent telepathy in connection with telephone calls is common.
Rupert Sheldrake – Author and Biologist
@Tio
in reply to Tio

diaspora - Link to source

Amina Jojo

@Tio
Wikipedia is common sense. I haven't read it, because I think I know the main argument, and would have used it myself some time ago. It's how I was educated in school and at home. If there is something in the article you want me to answer to, please tell me.

Apart from that I recommend thinking about Sheldrake's experiment, and what it would mean if it wasn't fake.

Not having seen the Rappaport video (@-jonny-), to me it is clear that the recognition of psychic phenomena would have an impact on how mental illnesses are percieved and treated, apart from the diagnosis issue.

@Tio @-jonny-
in reply to Amina Jojo

friendica (DFRN) - Link to source

Tio

A variety of tests have been performed to demonstrate telepathy, but there is no scientific evidence that the power exists.[9][83][84][85] A panel commissioned by the United States National Research Council to study paranormal claims concluded that "despite a 130-year record of scientific research on such matters, our committee could find no scientific justification for the existence of phenomena such as extrasensory perception, mental telepathy or 'mind over matter' exercises... Evaluation of a large body of the best available evidence simply does not support the contention that these phenomena exist."[86] The scientific community considers parapsychology a pseudoscience.[87][88][89][90] There is no known mechanism for telepathy.[91]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telepath…

Case closed. There is nothing we can talk about if there is science and experiments showing this obvious thing is nonsense. I would like you to kindly accept that and move on. Am definitely not interested to talk about telepathy in 2026 no more than talking about witches.

in reply to Tio

diaspora - Link to source

-jonny-

@Amina Jojo I'd say that is definitely the case. It is interesting to note that the view of mental illness in tribal societies is completely different. In fact they don't see it as illness at all but some kind of communication from the spirit realm. There is an article about that topic I read some time ago I can recommend. It is linked to the concept of the dark night of the soul.

The Shamanic View of Mental Illness

This African Shaman believes there's a better way to approach mental illness.
UPLIFT
@Amina Jojo
in reply to Tio

diaspora - Link to source

-jonny-

@Tio My friend, I really don't feel the urge to argue with you, since it is very hard to argue with someone who obviously has some kind of superiority complex. Believing your truth is the only one out there is arrogant at best (or fascist at worst). Keep your materialistic world view if it suits you. I have nothing against it. In fact I have been there myself. My opinion about paranormal phenomena though is not based on a Wikipedia article (which btw is not a very reliable and far from scientific source to quote). It is based on personal experience.

Which concludes this topic for me. I guess the only thing we have in common is our love for free software. That's okay.

Have a nice day.

@Tio
in reply to -jonny-

friendica (DFRN) - Link to source

Tio

Quite an irony for you to say that when you are talking about a total nonsense that has been debunked by scientists via the scientific method for hundreds of years now, and by scientists from all around the world. You need to understand what science is. Experiments, replication from independent organizations, measurements, etc.. Not some dude who makes a youtube video or some book written by who-knows-who.

But man such an irony for you to associate me with a religious fundamentalist. I wish you could see the astonishing stupidity you have soaked yourself into. But you won't. As it usually is with those who are "awake" and "against science" or "scientism" as they call it. What a joke.

Let's move on. You go live in your make-belief fantasy and I live in a scientific reality. And we can ignore each other. I think that would be better for both of us.

Go believe in whatever you want, the world is a mess anyway it won't make any difference, we are already in the Idiocracy era.

in reply to Tio

diaspora - Link to source

-jonny-

Go believe in whatever you want


How generous of you. Finally! Thank you.

I have just one last question. You seem to have the need to lecture me about what “science” is. Like a religious person that wants to convince me how and why his religion is better. Why is that? (I’m asking because I hold a scientific degree for over a decade now and am well aware about its benefits and its limitations)

I never said I am “anti science”. Far away from it! The scientific method is an incredibly valuable tool (even for paranormal phenomena). And since I am 100% certain about that I don’t have the need to convince anyone.

in reply to -jonny-

friendica (DFRN) - Link to source

Tio

I am far from lecturing you, all I am saying is that you go against what is scientifically proven at this moment in regards to that "paranormal phenomena". You make extraordinary claims, and you need ofc extraordinary evidence. Don't take it with me, the random fedi guy, go do some science with your scientific background and prove that these "paranormal phenomena" are actually scientifically valid. Until then they are not. If you want to accept it or not, it is a different question....

When something is scientifically proven to be factual we have no choice but to accept it. And so would I if these "paranormal phenomena" will be scientifically valid.

We can't solve this issue here. Go do the science.

in reply to Tio

diaspora - Link to source

-jonny-

As I already said. The science is there and has been there for decades now. If you are interested you are invited to inform yourself (and no I don't mean Wikipedia ^^ ). If not, that's also okay. Fortunately everybody has the freedom to believe what he or she wants. I don't do missionary work nor do I care if you believe me or not. I just thought you might be interested in the talk I posted at the beginning. That's it.
in reply to -jonny-

friendica (DFRN) - Link to source

Tio

There is a reason why you make "is" italic in "The science is there" because even you probably understand that the "paranormal phenomena" is not accepted by the scientific consensus. Nothing scientifically proven. It is floating around circles of people who proclaim is something scientific about it, while in fact they lack any scientific proof to make it science.

I can't help you I'm afraid..."paranormal phenomena" is fantasy. Until it is proven to be anything scientific about these phenomena we can leave it as that....try to be humble and accept this reality.

in reply to Tio

diaspora - Link to source

-jonny-

That's because you don't know me Tio. Actually, you don't know anything about me. You are merely projecting your prejudices onto me based upon some text I've written. But I must admit it was really funny, so I guess I have to thank you for making me laugh.

Now, if you had read what I wrote earlier, you would have noticed that my opinion is based on personal experience. Not on pretending, not wishful thinking, and certainly not on a Wikipedia article. But you chose to put something in my mouth that came right out of your imagination. That's not "humbleness", that is pure ignorance paired with arrogance.

in reply to Tio

friendica (DFRN) - Link to source

Alien (A23P)

in reply to Tio

friendica (DFRN) - Link to source

Alien (A23P)

Foundational corner stones aren't poop drops mate.
And saying "science is the BEST tool we have" is itself, scientifically, a bit of a stretch. Is it "a" tool, yes. Far as it being "the best"....
May we remember Goddell....
math.uni-hamburg.de/home/khoms…

And as already prior noted, one may have fun in attempts to bring their "scientific facts" regarding what consciousness is.
*and if one can't establish that cornerstone, where's that leave the "psychological sciences"?*

My intent here, more than arguing for or against things "paranormal", Rapport, Wikipedia, etc.
was simply to try to help keep arguments and/or debates from one way or another stretching outside their own boundaries.
Such said, in a look to placating appeals to "scientific fact"; the further work on Goddell has been offered for standing FACT on current and running "scientific facts".

in reply to Tio

diaspora - Link to source

Amina Jojo

Ok., now you're deleting unwanted comments. (or otherwise have blocked me)

My last one went back to the topic of psychiatry -- let's keep it to the point, you wrote.

Then I linked to scientific experiments trying to prove psychic phenomena. A 5 min video by a Cambridge biology professor. I thought you missed it by accident when I linked to Sheldrake's experiment the first time and you didn't react in any way.

Now we all know that you, @Tio, are the one who deliberately ignores science.

@Tio
⇧