2 ms·
The argument you mention is mine, I was not directly attributing it to the comic. I mentioned the comic because I think it has many great examples of the subjec
by pirateking 13y ago
The argument you mention is mine, I was not directly attributing it to the comic. I mentioned the comic because I think it has many great examples of the subject being discussed (see Calvin's relationship with watching TV, in contrast to his relationship with his cardboard box and stuffed tiger).
I don't know what exactly constitutes an "authority" on psychology. If it is a degree in the subject - I have one and its weight is negligible. If it is amount of material published regarding the human condition - Bill Watterson is an authority in the eyes of the many who regularly cite his work, as are many other comedians, artists and writers.
However, last I checked, there is no prevailing general model of the human psyche (nor one for the biomechanism of the brain). Appeals to authority may be taking a while.
- vdaniuk 13y agoPublished papers in psychology journals are authoritative sources for information. I tried googling for information related to Bill Watterson and psychology and couldn't find any links to the relevant information. I am sure that comedy has a lot of insights to offer scientists who study human mind, but I really dont understand why psychologists and/or psychiatrists cite his work. I would like to be proven wrong, could you direct me to the relevant interesting bits of information?