4 ms·

> disagreement and people being wildly wildly wrong in good faith Unfortunately but the most important basic studies of psychiatry were bullshit. And maybe the

> disagreement and people being wildly wildly wrong in good faith Unfortunately but the most important basic studies of psychiatry were bullshit. And maybe they were in good faith, but it's incredibly hard to believe that. Freud, for instance, was either serial sex offender and mass-accomplice to sexual abuse, or an incredible rube ... You see Freud saw sexual fantasies everywhere in women. They would fantasize about getting raped by this or that family member. There's a tiny little problem with that ... It's come out in more than a few cases that these patients were in fact raped, assaulted and ... by family members and others. Afterwards these "patients" saw everyone's intentions to be sexual and expressed that by seeing sexual abuse everywhere and worrying about what would happen to them. Strange, isn't it ? Freud never once saw it. God knows how many women tried to convince him to help them get justice, but it must have been over 100 at least. Never once did he help. Maybe he knew, maybe he didn't. He did lock quite a few of them away. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Freudian_Coverup https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Freudian_Coverup But no worries ! Since then we've vastly improved efficiency: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_abuse_of_psychiatry https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_abuse_of_psychiatry

Retric 8y ago
It's generally accepted that Science increases accuracy over time, but I don't think people understand what that looks like. Intuitively people tend to think of random ideas to be 50/50 true or false. But, the space of possible vs actual means random ideas are almost always false. So, fields like medicine demonstrate you can spend generations looking into something and still be wildly wrong. Freud like all early researchers had no idea what was going on. But, as a baseline to be improved upon he still provides part of a useful foundation for the discipline.
- candiodari 8y ago
  > Freud like all early researchers had no idea what was going on. I would like to point out that the more you read about this issue, the harder this is to believe. I hadn't mentioned this, but obviously Freud had a clear financial incentive to enable and hide the sexual abuse that the people who paid for his services committed. And of course, there's the possibility (as some of his patients claim) that he himself also committed those acts, so he may have been protecting himself. (and I don't mean the weird and obviously sexual treatments used, I mean he may have actually raped his patients) That's one. Second is that even now there are very atrocious signs about psychiatry, and the other fields of psychiatry, like child services both academic and practice, as both have seen systematic, often legally supported abuse. Just read that link. Some of it, like the abuse in the Soviet Union is in the past. Most of it is not. The very basis of child services, the "show me on this anatomically correct doll ..." study was shown to be a fraud. Kids simply point out what they find interesting, and the outcome is random. No correlation to abuse at all. In the study, researchers simply lied about what the kids pointed out. Oops. How many kids were locked away by child services because they pointed at the wrong part ? There can be no doubt that we're talking tens of thousands minimum. And of course, https://www.ncjrs.gov/App/Publications/abstract.aspx?ID=233562 https://www.ncjrs.gov/App/Publications/abstract.aspx?ID=2335... . There are no words. The government is unwilling to stop it's use even when fraud was shown. And let's just not mention the question of retracting and fixing of decisions made in the past. Very similar issues exist for mental services. On the practice side there is open abuse as well. The main child services decision maker in Norway "used child porn" for 20 years (of course this person has also assigned kids to himself, because of course he did ... note that these children have not been taken away from him after he was found out, nor has he been jailed for what he did. Add to that that the organization he was part of is regularly accused of endemic racism, excessive violence, kidnapping, torture, and worse, causing the deaths of children) That was 1 year ago. I mean I guess he was doing it for the past 20 years (minimum). But this person got caught 1 year ago. And the system, of course, supported him, after he got caught. How can anyone, at this point, believe that the organization of child services has, in the most generous interpretation, not been infiltrated and is being used to enable and legalize paedophilia, rather than prevent it ? Worst interpretation, of course, is that there never was any other goal. (in Norway, but equally horrifying scandals have occured in the UK, the Netherlands, Belgium, France, Spain and Italy. And I'm pretty damn sure that's because I haven't checked many other countries, or just don't speak the language) The only reason is "provides a useful foundation of the discipline" is that there are many people whose livelihood depends on this being true ... even when we know it's not just a lie, it was at least partly a bunch of criminals hiding their crimes ... And today, it's no different at least somewhat serve to help disgusting abusers and torturers to commit and hide their deeds. Nor was it different in the past, as we now know plenty of scandals. Nor was it different under other systems. Democracies, dictatorships, communist states, monarchies, ... it doesn't matter, it happened in all of them. Christian, Muslim, atheist, militant atheist states ... and let's just quickly mention what Japan got caught doing : chemical weapons research on mental patients ... whose status as mental patients was established under very dubious circumstances. None have received compensation, or an apology, because of course not. > you can spend generations looking into something and still be wildly wrong. Unfortunately that is very clearly not what happened. Criminals and immoral politicians decided what sort of theory would be useful and the result of that is still used today as authoritative. And even then we're disregarding the fact that even today results in psychology are so often rather thinly veiled frauds. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diederik_Stapel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diederik_Stapel Note how "trustworthy" this person was. Before he was found out, here's his biography: Stapel obtained an M.A. in psychology and communications from the University of Amsterdam (UvA) in 1991.[3] In 1997 he obtained his Ph.D. cum laude in social psychology from the UvA.[3] He became professor at the University of Groningen in 2000[3] and moved to Tilburg University in 2006, where he founded TiBER, the Tilburg Institute for Behavioral Economics Research.[3] In September 2010, Stapel became dean of the social and behavioral sciences faculty.[3] Stapel received the "Career Trajectory Award" from the Society of Experimental Social Psychology in 2009 Unfortunately all of this was the result of about 15 years of constant frauds, a fact complained about by double digit numbers of his students, with zero results. Needless to say, his book is used by child services and in the Netherlands, and they have not made any retractions, apologies, or changed any of their decisions (which result in incarcerating children) as a result of this. At what point do we say "this is a total failure" and call these people off ? I guess they're just too useful for corrupt politicians.
  - DoctorOetker 8y ago
    I have absolutely no idea why your comment is being downvoted, I guess people incorrectly read your comment that any kind of self-described child service (or caretaker) is necessarily abusive. The problem is when people blindly assume good faith without any provable and verifiable system to ensure this is so. Or perhaps they think you hold this opinion because they blindly suspect you don't think kids (or peoole in general) in trouble deserve care. Under such criticism, how is it possible to demand publically verifiable care, if the moment one demands it you are branded as cheaping out on poor souls???
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- DoctorOetker 8y ago
  Well, there's hypothetically a way to find out: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16947652 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16947652 if after introduction of such a system, the number of "hysteria" diagnoses or whatever modern equivalent starts dropping substantially, it would prove Rush right.

Retric 8y ago

It's generally accepted that Science increases accuracy over time, but I don't think people understand what that looks like. Intuitively people tend to think of random ideas to be 50/50 true or false. But, the space of possible vs actual means random ideas are almost always false. So, fields like medicine demonstrate you can spend generations looking into something and still be wildly wrong. Freud like all early researchers had no idea what was going on. But, as a baseline to be improved upon he still provides part of a useful foundation for the discipline.

candiodari 8y ago
> Freud like all early researchers had no idea what was going on. I would like to point out that the more you read about this issue, the harder this is to believe. I hadn't mentioned this, but obviously Freud had a clear financial incentive to enable and hide the sexual abuse that the people who paid for his services committed. And of course, there's the possibility (as some of his patients claim) that he himself also committed those acts, so he may have been protecting himself. (and I don't mean the weird and obviously sexual treatments used, I mean he may have actually raped his patients) That's one. Second is that even now there are very atrocious signs about psychiatry, and the other fields of psychiatry, like child services both academic and practice, as both have seen systematic, often legally supported abuse. Just read that link. Some of it, like the abuse in the Soviet Union is in the past. Most of it is not. The very basis of child services, the "show me on this anatomically correct doll ..." study was shown to be a fraud. Kids simply point out what they find interesting, and the outcome is random. No correlation to abuse at all. In the study, researchers simply lied about what the kids pointed out. Oops. How many kids were locked away by child services because they pointed at the wrong part ? There can be no doubt that we're talking tens of thousands minimum. And of course, https://www.ncjrs.gov/App/Publications/abstract.aspx?ID=233562 https://www.ncjrs.gov/App/Publications/abstract.aspx?ID=2335... . There are no words. The government is unwilling to stop it's use even when fraud was shown. And let's just not mention the question of retracting and fixing of decisions made in the past. Very similar issues exist for mental services. On the practice side there is open abuse as well. The main child services decision maker in Norway "used child porn" for 20 years (of course this person has also assigned kids to himself, because of course he did ... note that these children have not been taken away from him after he was found out, nor has he been jailed for what he did. Add to that that the organization he was part of is regularly accused of endemic racism, excessive violence, kidnapping, torture, and worse, causing the deaths of children) That was 1 year ago. I mean I guess he was doing it for the past 20 years (minimum). But this person got caught 1 year ago. And the system, of course, supported him, after he got caught. How can anyone, at this point, believe that the organization of child services has, in the most generous interpretation, not been infiltrated and is being used to enable and legalize paedophilia, rather than prevent it ? Worst interpretation, of course, is that there never was any other goal. (in Norway, but equally horrifying scandals have occured in the UK, the Netherlands, Belgium, France, Spain and Italy. And I'm pretty damn sure that's because I haven't checked many other countries, or just don't speak the language) The only reason is "provides a useful foundation of the discipline" is that there are many people whose livelihood depends on this being true ... even when we know it's not just a lie, it was at least partly a bunch of criminals hiding their crimes ... And today, it's no different at least somewhat serve to help disgusting abusers and torturers to commit and hide their deeds. Nor was it different in the past, as we now know plenty of scandals. Nor was it different under other systems. Democracies, dictatorships, communist states, monarchies, ... it doesn't matter, it happened in all of them. Christian, Muslim, atheist, militant atheist states ... and let's just quickly mention what Japan got caught doing : chemical weapons research on mental patients ... whose status as mental patients was established under very dubious circumstances. None have received compensation, or an apology, because of course not. > you can spend generations looking into something and still be wildly wrong. Unfortunately that is very clearly not what happened. Criminals and immoral politicians decided what sort of theory would be useful and the result of that is still used today as authoritative. And even then we're disregarding the fact that even today results in psychology are so often rather thinly veiled frauds. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diederik_Stapel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diederik_Stapel Note how "trustworthy" this person was. Before he was found out, here's his biography: Stapel obtained an M.A. in psychology and communications from the University of Amsterdam (UvA) in 1991.[3] In 1997 he obtained his Ph.D. cum laude in social psychology from the UvA.[3] He became professor at the University of Groningen in 2000[3] and moved to Tilburg University in 2006, where he founded TiBER, the Tilburg Institute for Behavioral Economics Research.[3] In September 2010, Stapel became dean of the social and behavioral sciences faculty.[3] Stapel received the "Career Trajectory Award" from the Society of Experimental Social Psychology in 2009 Unfortunately all of this was the result of about 15 years of constant frauds, a fact complained about by double digit numbers of his students, with zero results. Needless to say, his book is used by child services and in the Netherlands, and they have not made any retractions, apologies, or changed any of their decisions (which result in incarcerating children) as a result of this. At what point do we say "this is a total failure" and call these people off ? I guess they're just too useful for corrupt politicians.
- DoctorOetker 8y ago
  I have absolutely no idea why your comment is being downvoted, I guess people incorrectly read your comment that any kind of self-described child service (or caretaker) is necessarily abusive. The problem is when people blindly assume good faith without any provable and verifiable system to ensure this is so. Or perhaps they think you hold this opinion because they blindly suspect you don't think kids (or peoole in general) in trouble deserve care. Under such criticism, how is it possible to demand publically verifiable care, if the moment one demands it you are branded as cheaping out on poor souls???
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
DoctorOetker 8y ago
Well, there's hypothetically a way to find out: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16947652 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16947652 if after introduction of such a system, the number of "hysteria" diagnoses or whatever modern equivalent starts dropping substantially, it would prove Rush right.