4 ms·

Homosexuality was considered a disorder until fairly recently

DyslexicAtheist 8y ago
I always wonders who benefits from these treatments other then the doctors and scientist lining their pockets, along with academics circle-jerking their way to juicy funding. Labels like narcissism are just a way to tell a whole group of people that they're ill. In fact it's a personality trait that according to "research" is rampant in management professions. There are so many crappy online tests that measure your tendency to "narcissism" (and any extroverted high-achiever might fall into their trap) ... but if you look at the research it gets flimsy very quickly. They quickly talk about a "spectrum" indicating they have no fucking idea what they're doing. A bit like the current tendency to over diagnose kids on the autistic spectrum. Flimsy jargon like "spectrum" is excellent precondition for whole industries to emerge that can line their pockets. imvho psychology / psychiatry must be one of the most fraudulent sciences of our times (check out all the research that was done by these crooks to devise better methods of interrogation and soft torture) ... something, something "medical industrial complex". EDIT: what @zamalek describes above "My therapist has explained the biggest issue about PDs: the disorders make a person extremely unlikely to seek out help," sounds like the perfect cover for a fraudulent practice. Such language IMO is outright dangerous to anyone who may be diagnosed without their consent (e.g. by SJW's or society in general).
da_chicken 8y ago
Yes, so was gender identity disorder (i.e., transgender) which was often classified with pedophillia or body integrity disorder. There is no frame of reference for psychology to use except society and general assessments of normality and expected behavior. That mean the only method to determine whether or not something is a disorder at all is a) determine the impact of the condition on the individual's ability to function, and b) determine whether or not the condition results in harm to the individual or others. These are both very subjective measures. The fact that we think we're more right today than we were yesterday is really pretty immaterial.

I always wonders who benefits from these treatments other then the doctors and scientist lining their pockets, along with academics circle-jerking their way to juicy funding. Labels like narcissism are just a way to tell a whole group of people that they're ill. In fact it's a personality trait that according to "research" is rampant in management professions. There are so many crappy online tests that measure your tendency to "narcissism" (and any extroverted high-achiever might fall into their trap) ... but if you look at the research it gets flimsy very quickly. They quickly talk about a "spectrum" indicating they have no fucking idea what they're doing. A bit like the current tendency to over diagnose kids on the autistic spectrum. Flimsy jargon like "spectrum" is excellent precondition for whole industries to emerge that can line their pockets. imvho psychology / psychiatry must be one of the most fraudulent sciences of our times (check out all the research that was done by these crooks to devise better methods of interrogation and soft torture) ... something, something "medical industrial complex". EDIT: what @zamalek describes above "My therapist has explained the biggest issue about PDs: the disorders make a person extremely unlikely to seek out help," sounds like the perfect cover for a fraudulent practice. Such language IMO is outright dangerous to anyone who may be diagnosed without their consent (e.g. by SJW's or society in general).

da_chicken 8y ago

Yes, so was gender identity disorder (i.e., transgender) which was often classified with pedophillia or body integrity disorder. There is no frame of reference for psychology to use except society and general assessments of normality and expected behavior. That mean the only method to determine whether or not something is a disorder at all is a) determine the impact of the condition on the individual's ability to function, and b) determine whether or not the condition results in harm to the individual or others. These are both very subjective measures. The fact that we think we're more right today than we were yesterday is really pretty immaterial.