Not really. First of all, see my edit, which was there many hours before your reply: This is a side-topic about laypeople misappropriating technical terms, whil

Not really. First of all, see my edit, which was there many hours before your reply: This is a side-topic about laypeople misappropriating technical terms, while the submission is about professional (social) psychologists. I am not a psychologist, did not attempt to discuss psychology, hence this attempted gotcha is invalid. Second of all, my attempt (butchered or not) at using this word has no relation to the field of psychology at all since it is inspired by Marx’s use, who probably got it from Hegel (predates professional psychology, does it not?). The vernacular meaning (apparently, according to MW) means to be very fond of something. But what I mean in this context has got nothing to do with being in love with some inanimate object (in a non-sexual way); it means to use some object (although in this case an abstract one) as something to fixate on in lieu of appreciating and understanding wholly non-tangible things that may only be fully understood as relations. In this case, instead of trying to comprehend the mind as more of a web of associations, of cause and effect, you/they invent the fetish of the very animated “ego” which is trying to sabotage your every effort to achieve mindfulness, perform better in your corporate job, or what have you.