Topic: When one has too much of one thing, Id Ego or Super Ego?
Anonymous A started this discussion 11 years ago #41,802
Would it result in mental illness?
hamfist !t5TYQ9eJPs joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 1 minute later[^] [v] #555,376
> pop psychology
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 11 years ago, 1 minute later, 3 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #555,377
hamfist !t5TYQ9eJPs replied with this 11 years ago, 1 minute later, 5 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #555,378
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 11 years ago, 3 minutes later, 8 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #555,379
@previous (hamfist !t5TYQ9eJPs)
You are in Scientology? I am in it you mean? Because i remember seeing a documentary and Scientology hates Freud and the idea of psychology.
You are in Scientology? I am in it you mean? Because i remember seeing a documentary and Scientology hates Freud and the idea of psychology.
hamfist !t5TYQ9eJPs replied with this 11 years ago, 8 minutes later, 17 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #555,383
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 11 years ago, 4 minutes later, 21 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #555,384
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 1 hour later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #555,404
@OP
If you want to take a Freudian view, you could interpret it that way. An overactive superego could be attributed to OCD, for example. Or an overpowerful ID might result in something like aggressive tendencies.
But honestly, I'm not all that into Freud stuff. It's not scientific or falsifiable.
@555,376 (hamfist !t5TYQ9eJPs)
> Freud
> pop psychology
lolbud
If you want to take a Freudian view, you could interpret it that way. An overactive superego could be attributed to OCD, for example. Or an overpowerful ID might result in something like aggressive tendencies.
But honestly, I'm not all that into Freud stuff. It's not scientific or falsifiable.
@555,376 (hamfist !t5TYQ9eJPs)
> Freud
> pop psychology
lolbud
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 11 years ago, 29 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #555,413
@previous (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
When you said its not scientific, i am reminded of a psychologist who is himself narcissistic. He made a great point that is hard to put into words, it was a defense of psychology's lack of scientific bases. In order for something to be called science, it must have replicated results but the human mind is too difficult for that because each case is different as the subject interprets everything differently and lives in a different world. Every case is in itself a special case, a case of misery that reveals itself differently based on upbringing and culture and individual tendencies.
When you said its not scientific, i am reminded of a psychologist who is himself narcissistic. He made a great point that is hard to put into words, it was a defense of psychology's lack of scientific bases. In order for something to be called science, it must have replicated results but the human mind is too difficult for that because each case is different as the subject interprets everything differently and lives in a different world. Every case is in itself a special case, a case of misery that reveals itself differently based on upbringing and culture and individual tendencies.
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 11 years ago, 11 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #555,415
@previous (A)
You are overstating things, a little. You speak as if every individual human will have a unique outlook and give completely unique results in any sort of tests. It doesn't work like that.
Many things that have been studied (conformity, for example), successfully ran several experiments on various groups and was able to make a generalised statement about human behaviour. Furthermore, psychology also looks at things such as genetics and other biological influences So findings might not apply to everyone, but solid conclusions can certainly be made.
(also, are you Iceland guy? This is important)
You are overstating things, a little. You speak as if every individual human will have a unique outlook and give completely unique results in any sort of tests. It doesn't work like that.
Many things that have been studied (conformity, for example), successfully ran several experiments on various groups and was able to make a generalised statement about human behaviour. Furthermore, psychology also looks at things such as genetics and other biological influences So findings might not apply to everyone, but solid conclusions can certainly be made.
(also, are you Iceland guy? This is important)
(Edited 1 minute later.)
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 11 years ago, 12 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #555,416
@previous (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
But in the context that the narcissistic psychologist was in, it was to address the threat of neuroscience and psychiatrists who treat patients in a idiotic matter.
Yeah i am fucking Iceland guy and you are Killer Lettuce, the person who insists on me admitting that i am from iceland.
But in the context that the narcissistic psychologist was in, it was to address the threat of neuroscience and psychiatrists who treat patients in a idiotic matter.
Yeah i am fucking Iceland guy and you are Killer Lettuce, the person who insists on me admitting that i am from iceland.
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 11 years ago, 11 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #555,417
@previous (A)
Sorry, I don't really know what you're getting at. Or what this quite has to do with Freud's theories being unscientific.
Sorry, I don't really know what you're getting at. Or what this quite has to do with Freud's theories being unscientific.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 11 years ago, 8 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #555,418
@previous (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
What i mean is that there are sort of two schools of thought. The first school of thought, psychoanalysis, is a school of thought that first and foremost concerned itself with helping the weak and has done so a lot to the point of proving its effects. The second school of thought is the school that dehumanizes its subjects, their subjects are not people in the sense that you and i am, they are people who need to be fixed by drugs. In other words, a MRI scan will be preformed on the mentally ill and then what it reveals, like extreme pain, shall be dealt with by drugs and in this case pain killers.
The brutality of it all is that the pain killers merely makes you conform to the world that your psych cannot conform to without pain.
Why was it important for me to admit i am iceland guy?
What i mean is that there are sort of two schools of thought. The first school of thought, psychoanalysis, is a school of thought that first and foremost concerned itself with helping the weak and has done so a lot to the point of proving its effects. The second school of thought is the school that dehumanizes its subjects, their subjects are not people in the sense that you and i am, they are people who need to be fixed by drugs. In other words, a MRI scan will be preformed on the mentally ill and then what it reveals, like extreme pain, shall be dealt with by drugs and in this case pain killers.
The brutality of it all is that the pain killers merely makes you conform to the world that your psych cannot conform to without pain.
Why was it important for me to admit i am iceland guy?
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 11 years ago, 13 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #555,419
@previous (A)
That's not really the same issue as how scientific and subjective psychology is, though. And I'm not quite sure that psychology is divided up like that. You can be a psychiatrist/neurologist and still treat people as individuals. Or you can be in a different area of psychology and dehumanise people a bit. It's not just divided up by what area of the field they're in.
> Why was it important for me to admit i am iceland guy?
I'm a reluctant about discussing this sort of thing with you, given how your philosophy threads go. I'm imaging that anything I say would have zero impact and you'd just stick to your claims.
That's not really the same issue as how scientific and subjective psychology is, though. And I'm not quite sure that psychology is divided up like that. You can be a psychiatrist/neurologist and still treat people as individuals. Or you can be in a different area of psychology and dehumanise people a bit. It's not just divided up by what area of the field they're in.
> Why was it important for me to admit i am iceland guy?
I'm a reluctant about discussing this sort of thing with you, given how your philosophy threads go. I'm imaging that anything I say would have zero impact and you'd just stick to your claims.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 11 years ago, 9 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #555,421
@previous (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
Well, jesus this is hard. It is indeed divided up but do i know the exact circumstances? I don't think i know it but i have heard of it. Psychology concerns itself with that to try and change the patient into by simply talking to the person. This results in changes in the subject's brain as it can even begun rewiring itself. Psychiatrists however think the whole talking thing is nonsense, its not worth talking to your patients. Weather you agree or not, mentally ill people have two main options which is psychoanalysis or psychiatrist. Psychiatrist's are easily fooled by their patients.
> I'm imaging that anything I say would have zero impact and you'd just stick to your claims.
I worry about that all the time when i discuss with people, that i am just talking to a wall. I never really ask the name of the wall.
Well, jesus this is hard. It is indeed divided up but do i know the exact circumstances? I don't think i know it but i have heard of it. Psychology concerns itself with that to try and change the patient into by simply talking to the person. This results in changes in the subject's brain as it can even begun rewiring itself. Psychiatrists however think the whole talking thing is nonsense, its not worth talking to your patients. Weather you agree or not, mentally ill people have two main options which is psychoanalysis or psychiatrist. Psychiatrist's are easily fooled by their patients.
> I'm imaging that anything I say would have zero impact and you'd just stick to your claims.
I worry about that all the time when i discuss with people, that i am just talking to a wall. I never really ask the name of the wall.
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 11 years ago, 16 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #555,425
@previous (A)
CBT is very successful, as are a lot of grief counselling therapies. I think it'd be foolish to just completely ignore the benefits of one of the treatments, if they could be applicable, and I still don't view psychology as rigidly divided in ideology as you're implying.
> Psychiatrists however think the whole talking thing is nonsense, its not worth talking to your patients.
But they'd need to talk to their patients to try and get an understanding of what's wrong and the person's situation.
CBT is very successful, as are a lot of grief counselling therapies. I think it'd be foolish to just completely ignore the benefits of one of the treatments, if they could be applicable, and I still don't view psychology as rigidly divided in ideology as you're implying.
> Psychiatrists however think the whole talking thing is nonsense, its not worth talking to your patients.
But they'd need to talk to their patients to try and get an understanding of what's wrong and the person's situation.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 11 years ago, 3 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #555,426
@previous (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
> But they'd need to talk to their patients to try and get an understanding of what's wrong and the person's situation.
Yeah but that is the thing, they wait to hear what the problem is. In a narcissistic personality, the problem is always other people. So the doctor will give the narcissist drugs that remove fear and pain, that person will go on to do more harm to others as now he/she can do so without pain or fear.
> But they'd need to talk to their patients to try and get an understanding of what's wrong and the person's situation.
Yeah but that is the thing, they wait to hear what the problem is. In a narcissistic personality, the problem is always other people. So the doctor will give the narcissist drugs that remove fear and pain, that person will go on to do more harm to others as now he/she can do so without pain or fear.
squeegee joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 6 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #555,432
there's an antifear drug? what is science doing?.
better not mix that shit with viagra
better not mix that shit with viagra
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 11 years ago, 5 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #555,433
@previous (squeegee)
Well you know drugs have side effects, like xanax is supposed to remove anxiety but it does more then that indeed. You know what a person once told me? He told me that he thought he could face up to all the things he feared with the right drug which was xanax. When he took it, he instead feared not to face up to the things that would happen if he did not face up to the things he feared.
Well you know drugs have side effects, like xanax is supposed to remove anxiety but it does more then that indeed. You know what a person once told me? He told me that he thought he could face up to all the things he feared with the right drug which was xanax. When he took it, he instead feared not to face up to the things that would happen if he did not face up to the things he feared.
kook !!mCVqftDha joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 39 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #555,451
Anonymous F joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 9 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #555,457
@555,404 (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
> An overactive superego could be attributed to OCD, for example
Or sperging.
> An overactive superego could be attributed to OCD, for example
Or sperging.
Anonymous G joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 2 hours later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #555,533
@555,451 (kook !!mCVqftDha)
Kook, have there been any studies into the serotonin levels present in the brains of psychopaths and sociopaths?
Kook, have there been any studies into the serotonin levels present in the brains of psychopaths and sociopaths?
redneck joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 2 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #555,536
Would too much Lego result in autism?
kook !!mCVqftDha replied with this 11 years ago, 1 minute later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #555,540
@555,533 (G)
Im looking into this right now for an upcoming serial killer mega thread. I just found out that 28÷ of serial killers are on the autism spectrum.
Im looking into this right now for an upcoming serial killer mega thread. I just found out that 28÷ of serial killers are on the autism spectrum.