4 ms·
You are making the claim of an objective evaluation. It is your responsibility to provide proof of its objectivity. I otherwise an more willing to take somethin
by SolaceQuantum 8y ago
You are making the claim of an objective evaluation. It is your responsibility to provide proof of its objectivity. I otherwise an more willing to take something that at least has supporting evidence, dubious as it may be, to claims that have no evidence at all beyond ‘common sense’. I think that’s a pretty common sense position, but it’s clear we don’t agree.
- 50656E6973 8y agoThere is no objective proof that mental illness even exists, so the burden of proof is on those who claim it's just like real illnesses (psychiatrists and psychologists). They're the one's claiming to be scientific. I'm merely claiming they're not being scientific. There is plenty of evidence that disfunctional social environments often lead to disfunctional individuals.
- yyyymmddhhmmss 8y agoHa! No. The objectivity of the foresaid practice and diagnoses is missing to begin with. Junk science does not require objective proof to be unsubstantiated when it’s own lack of objectivity falls short, as evidenced in it’s process. This is a critique of process. These results were not substantiated to begin with, but merely institutionalized. Science is not a game of institutionalizing.