Top Psych Experiments / Psychologists cleverly embarrass themselves


OMG! The website is: Online Psychology Degree Guide

http://www.onlinepsychologydegree.info/influential-psychological-experiments/

Wow! Visit the site for the other 22 most influential psychology “experiments” PLUS many other informative lists offering “5 most” to “50 most” lists in this popular pop-social media format.

The 25 Most Influential Psychological Experiments in History

By Kristen Fescoe Published January 2016

“A Class Divided”

Study Conducted By: Jane Elliott

Study Conducted in 1968 in an Iowa classroom

Experiment Details: Jane Elliott’s famous experiment was inspired by the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and the inspirational life that he led. The third grade teacher developed an exercise to help her Caucasian students understand the effects of racism and prejudice.

Elliott divided her class into two separate groups: blue-eyed students and brown-eyed students. On the first day, she labeled the blue-eyed group as the superior group and from that point forward they had extra privileges, leaving the brown-eyed children to represent the minority group. She discouraged the groups from interacting and singled out individual students to stress the negative characteristics of the children in the minority group.

What this exercise showed was that the children’s behavior changed almost instantaneously. The group of blue-eyed students performed better academically and even began bullying their brown-eyed classmates. The brown-eyed group experienced lower self-confidence and worse academic performance. The next day, she reversed the roles of the two groups and the blue-eyed students became the minority group.

At the end of the experiment, the children were so relieved that they were reported to have embraced one another and agreed that people should not be judged based on outward appearances. This exercise has since been repeated many times with similar outcomes.

OMG! It’s ironic that the very studies on which psychologists base their claims are so obviously “super-flawed” that their claim to “be scientists” is easily disproven:

  1. Psychologists claim that use of human subjects as “lab rats” is an ethical “No-No”, but here we see uninformed, not-consenting “captive” children being manipulated (I would call it abuse…) by a teacher! The children suffered distress over the tactics used, including becoming bullies and objects to be bullied. How is this conceptually any different than “punishment” as pedagogy?
  2. The students were “relieved” to be “freed from” this awful manipulation – which automatically is interpreted as instant “moral enlightenment” over the question of physical appearances. This reveals the “social engineering” goals of psychology and the reckless “social puppeteer” attitude that prevails.
  3. This “experiment” (abuse of a word that has specific meaning in science) is “predatory” abuse of power: it may have been “repeated” in various forms (like a “fun prank”) but repetition means that many more children were subjected to manipulation and for no legitimate “reason”.

Car Crash Experiment

Study Conducted by: Elizabeth Loftus and John Palmer

Study Conducted in 1974 at The University of California in Irvine

Experiment Details: Loftus and Palmer set out to prove just how deceiving memories can be. The 1974 Car Crash Experiment was designed to evaluate whether wording questions a certain way could influence a participant’s recall by twisting their memories of a specific event.

  1. And yet, “psychological diagnosis” ARE BASED ON JUST THIS: “self-reporting” or “subjective” opinion of parents, teachers, school counselors, gym teachers, coaches, bystanders and the family dog! A “Psych Wizard” spends three minutes asking “loaded, leading” questions or worse – the “client” is required to fill out a “questionnaire” that is so biased that answers will “reveal” pathology – there are dozens to choose from.
  2. The “researchers” set out to prove what they already know ABOUT THEMSELVES: that manipulation can distort “memories” – it’s their prime directive.

The participants watched slides of a car accident and were asked to describe what had happened as if they were eyewitnesses to the scene. The participants were put into two groups and each group was questioned using different wording such as “how fast was the car driving at the time of impact?” versus “how fast was the car going when it smashed into the other car?” The experimenters found that the use of different verbs affected the participants’ memories of the accident, showing that memory can be easily distorted. 

This research suggests that memory can be easily manipulated by questioning technique, meaning that information gathered after the event can merge with original memory causing incorrect recall or reconstructive memory. The addition of false details to a memory of an event is now referred to as confabulation. This concept has very important implications for the questions used in police interviews of eyewitnesses (-and in psychology) 

As for the validity of “psychology” having a scientific “fact-finding” interest in assessing human behavior, we can see that the “goal” is to “test” manipulation techniques on human lab rats. It’s utterly non-objective, non-scientific and unethical. Psychologists refuse to be accountable for “proof or results” in theory or practice. 

Cognitive Dissonance Experiment

Study Conducted by: Leon Festinger and James Carlsmith

Study Conducted in 1957 at Stanford University

Experiment Details: The concept of cognitive dissonance refers to a situation involving conflicting attitudes, beliefs or behaviors. This conflict produces an inherent feeling of discomfort leading to a change in one of the attitudes, beliefs or behaviors to minimize or eliminate the discomfort and restore balance.

Again, the “basis” is putting humans in situations which manipulate personal morality, group ethics, social obedience, and “pain” in order to find out how these may be “applied” in contexts such as the classroom, workplace, consumer markets, media and advertising – and in government. The conclusion is simple: Lie, and use “bribes” and punishment – the Social Pyramid as we experience it every day. Psychology “intends” to legitimize lies, deception and manipulation as “scientifically valid” in human relationships. This is sick.

Cognitive dissonance was first investigated by Leon Festinger, after an observational study of a cult that believed that the earth was going to be destroyed by a flood. (Christians, perhaps?) Out of this study was born an intriguing experiment conducted by Festinger and Carlsmith where participants were asked to perform a series of dull tasks (such as turning pegs in a peg board for an hour). Participant’s initial attitudes toward this task were highly negative. (Anecdotal, hearsay, subjective opinion, not an “experiment” at all)

They were then paid either $1 or $20 to tell a participant waiting in the lobby (lie to them) that the tasks were really interesting. Almost all of the participants agreed to walk into the waiting room and persuade the next participant that the boring experiment would be fun. (The human lab rats were paid to lie and most agreed – where is motivation in this? Were they “students” who always need cash, or individuals who would lie because “an authority figure” asked them to? Who are these human beings ?)

When the participants were later asked to evaluate the experiment, (no, they were asked to evaluate their own experience) the participants who were paid only $1 rated the tedious task as more fun and enjoyable than the participants who were paid $20 to lie. Being paid only $1 is not sufficient incentive for lying and so those who were paid $1 experienced dissonance. They could only overcome that dissonance by coming to (being lied to) believe that the tasks really were interesting and enjoyable. Being paid $20 provides a reason for turning pegs and there is therefore no dissonance.

OMG! Where do I begin with dissecting this monstrosity of “social logic” and magical thinking?

(I need “fuel” – time for breakfast…LOL)

Advertisements

The Mathematics of “Big Brains” / Evolution

From PBS Science, March 2017

Why did humans evolve big brains? We don’t know, but math can help

Where is the math in this article? You’ll need to go to original paper.

by Kristin Hugo

A new model published Thursday in PLOS Computational Biology mathematically illustrates what led to the evolution of humans’ abnormally large brains. (A cliché that is not true – we have the brain the “fits” us.)

Evolutionary biologists devised these equations to tease apart the relationship between human brain size and the cost of maintaining a large brain. (This is physics: the human body and the evolutionary processes that shaped it, conform to physical laws) Over the last few decades, the pace and stages of brain growth in humans have become clearer. From birth to preschool, our brains quadruple in size. Our brains reach 90 percent of their final size by six years old, and they continue to grow slowly through adolescence until stopping in our mid-20’s.

The question is: Why?

Anthropologists have hypothesized — made educated speculations — about what factors in human evolution drive this pace. For example, newborns heavily rely on their families, so they can develop strong social bonds during their youth. (This is stated as if newborns have the intent to rely on other people, in order to develop social bonds; this is backwards! Human infants must rely on other people because they are helpless. The infant displays behavior that ought to elicit parental bonds, but in fact, there are a very high number of parents who do not respond appropriately –  this response ought to be instinctual, but as we commonly see in many domestic animals, this instinctual bond has been interrupted, is undeveloped, or damaged in the mother and other adults)

As humans get older, we increasingly learn to be self-sufficient (or not!); (learn to) use tools and learn about our environments. Scientists speculate both of these habits (?) contribute to brain growth, but they don’t know which of these factors or others have the greatest bearing. We are way off track already – Brain growth depends on NOURISHMENT and adult care – the protection and guidance that will allow the child  to learn to “operate” its body, regardless of the society, culture or group size that the infant will grow within.

A standard mathematical model (of what?) could provide clarity by quantitatively comparing hypotheses. (Or show that “educated speculations” lack credibility as descriptions of “the real world”

You’d think that PBS could hire a Competent science writers, or at least employ a science editor! This is piss-poor, garbled reporting!  An Asperger pet peeve: If we are going to “educate” the public about scientific Activity, we need Accurate language! Otherwise it’s just Blah, blah, blah.

Anthropologists can plug in their hypotheses to the model (not really) which then predicts brain size from birth to adulthood based on those numbers. If those numbers match what we know about the pace of human brain development, then the model supports the hypothesis. (What numbers? This is gobbled-gook!) “With this model, you can obtain predictions for each of the hypotheses to see which hypothesis yields a better prediction,” said evolutionary biologist Mauricio González-Forero of Université de Lausanne in France, who led the study. Aye, yai, yai!

The final model states that adult skill level equals adult brain mass times the cost of maintaining brain tissue divided by the cost of memory times a constant. Stated in laymen’s terms, this idea means as adult brain mass increases, so too does adult skill, assuming that the costs of maintaining the brain mass and memory stay constant. (Aye, yai, yai!!!!)

These costs include eating a lot in order to maintain the brain. (of the right kind of food) Brains make up 2 percent of our bodies, but consume 20 percent of our oxygen and sugars in our food to sustain the activity of billions of neurons. This mental gorging could have been a disadvantage for early humans thousands of years ago, because bigger diets, consisting of more calories, means having to spend more time hunting and foraging for food. If their evolving brains drained too much food and oxygen, then they might have been too tired to fend for themselves. (Yikes!)

God help us! Another naïve neurotypical narrative! First – this is backwards: IF food X provides more calories per “effort to obtain it” (work), you’re in luck – you will focus on obtaining food X: (bears, sharks, and millions of species do this) For early humans, exploiting a new “option” (such as animal protein) results in more calories, a benefit that then can be maximized by improving and tailoring technology toward getting this food AND for other activities as well. Once this “boost in calories” becomes more available, better brain nourishment (especially in children) provides more “brain power” for  developing new technologies and devising better strategies for survival. It’s a feedback process. ) 

Modern social humans (Americans) seek out “crappy food” that deprives them of the nutrition necessary for even minimal brain and body health. This is bad enough, but to starve our children’s brains is a crime!

While there is debate among anthropologists, many believe that social interaction is a major factor in increasing brain size. Knowing people, communicating with them and maintaining relationships takes a lot of brainpower. This is recent “social narrative” about agricultural societies; regardless of “social” influence, the brain runs on REAL ENERGY supplied by FOOD. What we see in contemporary hyper-social juvenalized humans is overconsumption of “crappy food” which fails to  provide adequate  nourishment. Compounded by “social demands” that consume too much of a child’s energy, leaves less energy for children to develop healthy brains and bodies: in many children, learning becomes impossible. What we see is a “shrinking” of brain size over the last 10,000 years of human domestication)

González-Forero’s model counters this narrative and asserts that humans gain more intelligence as they learn to use technology, which University of Wisconsin-Madison evolutionary anthropologist John Hawks describes as a controversial but revealing take on brain development. (Controversial= whacky = magical thinking) Many anthropologists look at the pace of brain growth in terms of social interactions, he added, but “this paper is saying maybe social relationships don’t have anything to do with it. It’s really neat to see such a cool, clear statement of that because it gives us a target.”

The socially-obsessed “naïve narrative” of the evolution of human brain has taken over anthropology and related “human sciences” – at the expense of logical reasoning  grounded in the reality of physical environments.

Logically, we can go much further: social activity can be detrimental to human survival, Energy expended on social activity consumes far more energy than it “supposedly” supplies; social activity redistributes food, water and fossil fuels to ultra-greedy nations, thus depriving millions of human beings the “nourishment” that children must have in order to develop. “Saving” children, by handing out “just enough gruel” to keep them alive temporarily, results in underdeveloped and damaged brains, and is unconscionable social activity.

Contemporary  humans suffer from this very real food-energy drain. We cannot provide clean water and proper nourishment to hundreds of millions of human children, but “spend” enormous amounts of energy on projects with “no energy return” – war, environmental destruction, and billions of useless products (can’t eat them!), the production of which consumes vast amounts of energy (especially human energy) that is needed for “brain growth”.

 

Epilepsy Forum / Sensory Overload Discussion

From an epilepsy site forum: 2006-2007

Epilepsy and Sensory Overload – Adults

Topic:

I have temporal lobe epilepsy with simple partial seizures. I also struggle with something I call sensory overload. I know that is a term for autism, but it is the best way to describe what is happening to me. I have difficulty when there is too much stimulation in the room. I become very agitated if, for example, there is music playing while the TV is on and people are talking. Add too many people to the stimulation and I become very stressed. If I cannot turn off the music and TV, I must leave the room. This agitation and stress is especially strong when I am around children because they tend to create a lot of stimulation with loud voices, banging and thumping from their physical activity, and they lack an understanding for personal space and often run/bump into me. I know too much noise can annoy anyone, but from what I have observed my agitation is much stronger than others in the same situation.

Is the sensory overload problem just another one of my issues or could there be some correlation between that and my epilepsy?

Comment 1.

I don’t know if there is a correlation but people can have Sensory Integration issues. This is not autism although I have read before it could be part of the spectrum. A person can be treated for sensory issues through an occupational therapist with specific training in this area. I am only familiar with therapists who work with children but there must be some out there who would work with adults who were never treated for this as a child. It is worth looking into. There also are books out there that specifically discuss sensory integration issues.

Comment 2.

I think i get something similar. I’m in the process of getting diagnosed with TLE (temporal lobe epilepsy), simple and complex partials. If there is too much to look at, I freak out. Like in shopping centers, all the colors, vastness, noises etc cause me problems. I just wrote in my blog about freaking out while shopping yesterday! I just feel as though I can’t process it all, and its just all too much.

If I am in a simple partial (epileptic seizure) I have to be in complete silence. Even if the TV is on it drives me nuts and I can’t look at anything.

I’m in the beginning stages of diagnosis, but I shall bring this up with my Neuro on my next appointment.

Comment 3.

I am being examined for Temporal Lobe Epilepsy and have also wondered about the Epilepsy and Sensory stuff connection.

I know EXACTLY what you are talking about!!! I call it “Tactile Defensiveness”.

When you said, “….my agitation is much stronger than others in the same situation,” bells went off in my head like “DING DING DING!! THIS IS TOTALLY ME!!”I knew instantly what you are talking about. If my 2 year old rams into my leg (which is like you say entirely normal for his age) I can actually get almost combative. There’s nothing rational about it, I cannot “think” my way out of this reaction. For me it seems to be hard-wired and almost reflexive, the way it would be if a doctor taps your knee with a rubber hammer.

Other “sensory overload” struggles I have:

*the waistband of my clothes often feels too tight, sometimes the socks around my ankles will feel too tight/clingy, sometimes the cuffs/wristband of my jackets will also feel too tight. I simply have to get rid of the offending article of clothes

*I have photosensitivity to many bright lights including sunshine. To compensate, I purchased a nice pair of shades, which happens to be in vogue

*certain cloth has always been aversive to me, in particular polyesther weaves, it was so coarse it felt almost like it scratched my skin. to this day I cannot use bed linen that is not 100% cotton and has a 400 thread count or higher b/c it feels too scratchy on my skin

*places with a lot of lights, sounds, crowds of people, I get panic stricken and overwhelmed, like you said SENSORY OVERLOAD

* cannot wear terry cloth socks b/c it feels to prickly and couldn’t stand the feeling of some face cloths taking a bath as a child

*I am overly sensitive to very hot or very cold temperatures, particularly bath water/shower water

*my shoelaces have to be laced up with the “exact same” tightness on both shoes or I go insane, literally I cannot stand it and have to fix it! LOL

*if I am in a bright store like WalMart sometimes the lights make me well…very on edge almost hair-trigger irritable

*my ears actually hurt when a fire truck puts it’s siren on to the point that when I was a child I would cover them up. As an adult I don’t want to look weird doing that, so I learned to just white knuckle through it with my fist and jaws clenched

*Smells are so strong in my nose that sometimes the scent is so aversive (like dog poo or skunk) that I gag and have to leave a situation. On the other hand pleasant smells are so strong it makes me feel like I’m in heaven if I like it (baking cookies etc) I speculate that I smell more keenly than everyone else

*Taste is the same way but thank God I never had texture issues with food like my sister does.

*If I get something sticky on my hands I have to wash it immediately, I just hate that feeling: maple syrup, jelly/jam

I could go on and on but the bottom line for me, being 36 years old, is that I had to learn to compensate for my heightened sensory issues by either avoiding siutations or de-sensitizing myself. This wasn’t a “formal” process it just happenened out of necessity and I consciously told myself to “sit with the discomfort” I just instinctively knew I had to do it.

Comment 4.

I have been told I self monitor a lot. I used to think this was stupid and ‘as if’, but I can now catch myself in the act. I suppose having a condition like us makes you super sensitive to every bodily sensation that we don’t assume to be normal. In fact, it seems I have decided every bodily sensation is abnormal!

I know there are certain things that my poor little brain doesn’t cope to well with like the whole lights thing, shopping centres, loud noises, heat, being super tired etc … although I think half the time I am so strung out about everything – anything will set me off or freak me out.

I find if its over-cast it sends me in to a tail spin. haha. Weird, hey? I love rainy days, but they make me feel awful. I think I need and respond well to normal natural light / sun shine. i seem to get worse when things get darker. Weird. Hmmm.


OMG! Could the “autism” “brain” “behavior” industry be any more chaotic, incoherent, or ridiculous?

Honestly! Do any of the “experts” ever talk to each other; compare notes, cases, or FACTS? Can they even recognize the vast duplication of diagnosis going on in “parallel universes” of research?

NEUROTYPICALS are bat-crap-crazy!

 

Terrifying neurotypical activity / Epidemic of “Cute Crap”

 

images3NYGGH4Funtitleddino

Puppies and kittens are cute. Young lions, tigers and bears are cute; adult carnivores are not. Neither are dinosaurs. A manufactured universe of “cute” has invaded children’s entertainment, educational programming, religious indoctrination, clothing, food – and of course, toys. Decades of girls, women (and some boys) think that the Barbie doll was present at the Big Bang.

Cute is a euphemism for infantile and trivial: For too many immature parents, babies are not living beings; they are toys; they are objects to be manipulated to get  attention.

SrdOGnPauFEiKzjR8BZyHX6B1RfDTL1F_lg

Child abuse.

babies_with_painted_eyebrows_is_trending_online_640_01

Funny-Pictures-of-Babies-With-Eyebrows

images1DN4TPC5thumb--happy-scared-confused-and-intrigued-funny-girls-weird-drawn-eyebrows-4269

Why do women abuse their faces?

"Cute" is a monstrous plot to infantilize all life on earth.

“Cute” is a monstrous plot to infantilize all life on earth.

images9LAV40XQ

Infantile religious advertising is everywhere!

imagesUBUKPNA0 imagesKAH81U8A

And why not pass out “cute” guns while we’re at it?

1433820952121

Metaphor, Analogy, Simile / Tragic Sci-Tech Examples

Let’s begin with a legitimate comparison (note: it’s VISUAL and accurate)

_________________________

Below: A standard “analogy” in basic physics courses: The problem is, that even basic physics courses assume that the student has “hung out” at the local water plant, worked for a construction company or was raised by a plumber. Does this really make “electricity-magnetism” accessible to the average student? Now they have to understand the behavior of water in a system in addition to struggling with the  “invisible” behavior of electrical systems. Plus vocabulary: “voltage source is analogous to water pump” is not exactly a “handy” mental exchange.

Okay – so the water system analogy isn’t terrible, but here is where the use of analogy drives me bonkers: number, quantity, volume, weight, density, forces …. believed to make “big or small” extremes of number and scale “comprehensible” to the human brain. Again – the assumption is that “equivalents” such as the earth covered in marbles or peas to some “impressive” depth is 1. meaningful 2. has a possibility of occurring outside of a supernatural “miracle” 3.  will ever be observed by one or more human beings. 4. will reduce the problem of incomprehensible quantity, number, etc in comparison to “human” scale. 

But, “1/18th of the surface area of the sun” makes “Avogadro’s Number” perfectly clear! What was it we were trying to explain? I’ve forgotten, and I have a headache.

Another terrific assumption is that Olympic swimming pools and football fields and stadiums are perfectly reasonable examples of “intuitive” volumes and areas because everyone has watched the Olympics on TV or has been to a football game.

And a more problematic question: Why are we presenting students with ridiculous   false analogies for actual measurable physical phenomenon, when the function of teaching science and technology is to impart awareness and knowledge of  “How the universe works” – that is, it’s NOT magic.  What we’re telling them is that physical properties, relationships and behaviors are baffling; that “physical reality-mathematics” are arbitrary, fantastical and unknowable (and unnecessary) That the highly unscientific games, videos and films that they watch are entirely plausible “versions” of reality.

While science education is making the obvious and provable reality that we occupy and depend on “obscure and imaginary” religions and politicians are doing the opposite:

Is it any mystery as to why millions of Americans believe that climate change, global warming and other major systemic problems are “government conspiracies?”

And in case one might imagine that biology and other areas are any less idiotic:

Imagine that the jelly-like substance in your cells that keeps everything in its place is a security guard at the mall; Imagine that your data is laundry…

 

 

 

 

Histrionic Personality Disorder / Or, the New Female “Norm”

Isn’t it a bit unfair to promote this behavior in young girls and women, and then label them with a personality disorder?

Hasn’t this “pattern of behavior” become the “ideal” in social media, entertainment, music and fashion?

From DSM-V: Persons with Histrionic Personality Disorder* are characterized by a pattern of excessive emotionality and attention seeking. Their lives are full of drama (so-called “drama queens”). They are uncomfortable in situations where they are not the center of attention.

  • People with this disorder are often quite flirtatious or seductive, and like to dress in a manner that draws attention to them.
  • They can be flamboyant and theatrical, exhibiting an exaggerated degree of emotional expression.
  • Yet simultaneously, their emotional expression is vague, shallow, and lacking in detail. This gives them the appearance of being disingenuous and insincere.
  • Moreover, the drama and exaggerated emotional expression often embarrasses friends and acquaintances as they may embrace even casual acquaintances with excessive ardor, or may sob uncontrollably over some minor sentimentality.

People with Histrionic Personality Disorder can appear flighty and fickle. Their behavioral style often gets in the way of truly intimate relationships, but it is also the case that they are uncomfortable being alone.

They tend to feel depressed when they are not the center of attention. When they are in relationships, they often imagine relationships to be more intimate in nature than they actually are.

People with Histrionic Personality Disorder tend to be suggestible; that is, they are easily influenced by other people’s suggestions and opinions. A literary character that exemplifies the Histrionic Personality Disorder is the character of Blanche DuBois in Tennessee William’s classic play, “Streetcar Named Desire.” A rather mild case compared to today’s female “role models” !!! 

Great send up – and ridicule – of women…

Despite being “hated” (and in-your-face displays of industrial-strength boobs) these “women” are drastically “masculinized” in behavior and appearance.

These “deformed” characters are presented in American pop-culture as proper role models for “how to be a successful woman” and the imitation of this “type” has spread like an invasive species among young girls, teenagers and (infantile-neotenic) adult women.

This “cultural” phenomenon is revenge / payback on the part of “top males” for women daring to fight for equality and change in the social order, and it’s a well-known  strategy to rationalize violence against an enemy. Portraying women as emotional psychopaths who are as “badly behaved” as men (or worse) – ie stripped of any claim to “classic feminine virtues” such as compassion, loyalty and unconditional love – that is, “civilized behavior” serves to validate any and all brutality toward them. It also demonstrates the “Biblical” paranoia that females, (if given any freedom), become hyper-sexual predators – castrators. In other words, females will usurp behavior that is reserved for privileged males.

See also: DSM-5 Top Ten Personality Disorders Cluster “B”Borderline Personality Disorder, Narcissistic Personality Disorder, Antisocial Personality Disorder, where you will find yourself, your friends, family members, children, favorite politicians, sports idols, bankers, mentors, pastors, priests, etc.!

 

 

 

PDD-NOS / Bat Crap Crazy Diagnosis Revealed

Kars 4 Kids $100 Million Dollar Charity Website. Oodles of parent-directed posts, services and programs for children. Anyone can donate $, but the services and programs are only for Jewish Children and Families. It might be worth converting if you can’t find services for your child’s needs.

“Your car donation will benefit Kars4Kids. Kars4Kids is a 501(c)(3), a national organization dedicated to addressing the educational, material, emotional and spiritual needs of Jewish children and their families.”

At least the posts are free!
If this post doesn’t convince people that the Psychiatry, Psychology, Psychotherapy industries; the Autism Industry; the Mental Health Industry and all the related “Helping Caring Fixing Industries” are a bat-crap crazy Socially, financially and Profit driven fraud” then I give up.

_______________________________

PDD-NOS stands for Pervasive Developmental Disorder–Not Otherwise Specified. Once upon a time, doctors diagnosed PDD-NOS when symptoms didn’t quite fit the picture of plain old Pervasive Developmental Disorder (PDD), itself, something of a wastebasket term. Now, neither term is in use.

Back in the day, PDD served as an umbrella for five disorders: Autism, Asperger’s syndrome, Childhood Disintegration Disorder (CDD), and Rett’s syndrome. But the authors of the most recent edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) decided to broaden the wastebasket and do away with most of these terms and their subcategories. Going forward, doctors will no longer diagnose “Asperger’s syndrome” for instance, but simply say someone has an Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD).

When the DSM V came out and even in the lead-up to its publication, a lot of people were upset. All of a sudden, people who had Asperger’s no longer had it. Instead, they simply had plain old autism. And people with PDD-NOS either had autism or something new called Social Communication Disorder (SCD).

Most people, when they think of autism, think of a syndrome that is severe. Asperger’s syndrome, on the other hand, has been thought of as being “almost normal” and maybe even quirky, cute, and interesting, in a geeky sort of way. If you’ve ever watched Criminal Minds on television, Dr. Spencer Reid is the perfect example of how people like to see Asperger’s. He’s loveable because he’s so awkward with people and yet so wide open and real. He’s a genius nerd. He’s interesting, upper class, a kind of savant.

Or perhaps when you think of Asperger’s, you think of something that causes mildly embarrassing confrontations in the supermarket, like the sort of thing that happens with Max Braverman in Parenthood. There’s angst, but also joy, and perhaps even social justice to the act of parenting a child like Max.

So if you’re a (white and wealthy) parent of a child with High-Functioning Autism (HFA), you’d probably much rather hear a diagnosis of Asperger’s than HFA, or at least your doctor would assume so and perhaps respond accordingly. You’d rather parent Max than Dustin Hoffman’s Raymond in Rainman.

By the same token, if you’re poor and black and your child had exactly those same symptoms, it’s likely the doctor, prior to 2013, would have simply said your child had autism or perhaps even PDD-NOS. There’s a problem here of consistency. There’s also a problem of mixing diagnostic boxes. HFA was interchangeable with Asperger’s and PDD-NOS could be interchangeable with autism, depending on a doctor’s cultural biases or upon how sure he was about that diagnosis—is it really “bad enough” to be autism? You have a problem here of sacrificing specificity for sensitivity’s sake so you keep it vague to prevent anyone from feeling too bad. You avoid the stigma of calling someone “autistic” if you think they might get upset.

PDD-NOS “Less Severe”

But since Asperger’s and PDD-NOS were deemed syndromes “less severe” than autism, 14 states didn’t offer people with these diagnoses access to services. While Asperger’s was the cute and quirky white person’s autism, PDD-NOS covered anything that didn’t quite fit the autism diagnosis, for instance Asperger’s. PDD-NOS could, for instance, be very mild autism. What the DSM V attempted to do, in eliminating so many terms and in making the listing for autism more broadly inclusive, was to address the bias, and make it possible for more people to receive much needed services.

But what happens to someone who has always thought of himself as having Asperger’s? It’s his identity. Suddenly you take it away and he’s now “autistic?” Ow. That bites.

Except it doesn’t. According to the Autism Speaks website, (OUCH! A notoriously disliked and suspect organization! Is K4Kids connected?) people can still call themselves what they always did. In fact, psychologists are allowed to designate “Asperger’s” as the type of autism a person has when writing up an evaluation or diagnosis, alongside the new diagnostic term autism spectrum disorder:

Many individuals may wish to retain their previous diagnosis as the label is considered part of their identity or may reflect a peer group with whom they identify. This is perfectly acceptable. A clinician can indicate both the DSM-5 diagnosis as well as the previous diagnosis, such as Asperger syndrome, in an individual’s clinical record.

The DSM-5 text states “Individuals with a well-established DSM-IV diagnoses of autistic disorder, Asperger’s disorder, or pervasive developmental disorder not otherwise specified should be given the diagnosis of “autism spectrum disorder”.

The bottom line is that nothing really changed except for the fact that more people on the autism spectrum can get the services they deserve. Meantime, there’s the hope that bias and stigma can be excluded from the diagnostic process for autism spectrum disorders. It’s time to stop worrying so much how things look and instead to put that energy toward helping people with the challenges they face.

Hopefully, we’re all evolved enough to see that autism can happen to anyone and it has nothing to do with what color you are or how much money you have. And if this is the case, we can shove all that to the side and concentrate on early diagnosis and creating more treatment options. Because that is how it should be in an ideal world.

 

 

 

Is a Spiritual Life Possible in the U.S.?

NO.

This may sound like another “glib” Aspie conclusion, but I’m serious! Please see previous post: What does “Spiritual” Mean? / The Protestant Work Ethic

I’ve learned over recent years that when I feel distress of a vague nagging type, there is a “real” problem behind it. I believe this is true for many Americans, who may not recognize that the source is environmental. One of the awful trends in modern American life is this: if you are “depressed” which is a highly-exploited generalized “mental state”, it’s your problem. Life is the American Dream, and you are just not pulling your weight. Job loss, poverty, illness, grief, violent neighborhoods, natural disasters? Hey! Buck up and shut up. Don’t be a buzz-kill. See a therapist; take drugs.

In the previous post, we learned that the early Protestants, the Calvinists, believed in pre-destination: God has only so many “reserved seats” waiting in heaven, and if you are not a Chosen Person, your only recourse is to work your ass off for minimum wage for the Chosen People. This makes the Protestant Elite “rich” (of whatever race, ethnicity, religion or national origin), but we all know that these are conscientious people who plow all their profits back into their “wealth machines” here in the U.S.  This ensures good jobs and a worthwhile reason for the non-chosen masses to exist at all – putting in a lifetime of service to ensure that the seats around the boardroom table in heaven are occupied by the Elites. Sorry; there are no “leftover” seats in heaven. Unfortunately, the ever-growing tonnage of wealth tied up in the “wealth machine” is the magic ticket to heaven; it must grow and grow and grow.

“Spirituality” in Protestant cultures is at best an obligation on the part of the Elite to “not enjoy” their wealth but to amass a fortune, an obligation that passes to the heirs. As for the masses – well, if you don’t become rich, it’s because God didn’t choose you to be rich.

When spelled out so plainly, it’s a “scheme” that sane human beings (or cats and dogs, for that matter), would reject. But this is America, and from the beginning of the European invasion, the continent was sold as Heaven on Earth. A magical place in which you could buy a “seat in heaven” whether or not you were one of the Chosen People. Suddenly, Predestination had a lot of “wiggle room.”

It’s arguable just when the *”don’t enjoy your wealth” commandment disappeared from the Capitalist Playbook; it certainly doesn’t exist today. Neither does “spirituality”. Despite the U.S. being one of the more “religious” nations on Earth, any notion that we were ever a spiritual society is a sham.

* It may have been simple geometry: as the Middle Class grew, the hierarchy of wealth had to expand to include millions more Americans. What’s the point in being “rich” but unable to show it? – a Middle Class person might live a more luxurious material existence than a “millionaire” chosen person.

But- ain’t America great! A Spiritual Life (and elections) can be bought.

 

 

 

How Psychologists Destroyed Public Education

A group pf psychologists were the first to re-enact the formation of the Grand Canyon. The historic event occurred in 1940 thanks to a grant from the National Park Service.

NOVEMBER / A high school in Arizona where I frequently work as a substitute

Back in the classroom after lunch, I can relax. The TA for the period is using one of the computers. I set my coffee on the desk and dig through a pile of papers and magazines set to one side. I strike intellectual gold, American style: a set of exercises designed by psychologists to “support” togetherness among staff and students.

I did not make this up: taxpayer-funded Ed. psych. consultants came up with this all by themselves.

THE PLAYPEN- Establish the boundaries of a playpen large enough to accommodate the group members, and allow group members to interact as babies and toddlers in the playpen. Establish the rules of no slapping, or biting, or hurting the other children. Let the interaction flow. SHARE.

NONVERBAL SHARING- Have the group stand in a circle. Each member, one at a time, non-verbally transmits a feelings message to each member of the group. SHARE. Option: May be done with eyes opened or closed.

HAND EXAMINATION: Instruct two people to non-verbally (!) examine each other’s hands. Ask them to to decide which one will “examine” first, and to allow at least 3 minutes to touch and look, before instructing the other partner to be the examiner. Ask each to verbally share the experience and specifically what they were able to discover about the partner. SHARE.

GROWING OLD- Ask two people to pretend they are very old. Insert cotton balls in their ears, dim the lights, and ask them to converse with each other. Give them a topic, eg, “Discuss what is going on in your life.” SHARE.

By this time I’m snickering and kicking the desk, and the TA looks my way. I ignore her because it just gets better:

RELIGIOUS PERSPECTIVE- Enact a situation which symbolizes a religious truth or teaching. Establish the time, place, circumstance and people and allow the action to flow. EXAMPLES: 1. Moses receiving the 10 C’s from God. 2. Jesus healing the sick 3. Embody the spirit of Bhudda 4. Be your God. SHARE

SCIENTIFIC PERSPECTIVE- Present an enactment which best describes a scientific or physical phenomenon. Allow the action to flow. EXAMPLES 1. Portray parts of the body (legs, liver, heart, eyes and explain the structure, functions and relationships to one another. (Let each person link with others and speak as anatomical parts.) 2. Portray Copernicus trying to tell 16th C people that the sun, not the earth is at the center of the solar system. 3. Embody a seed in the ground and act out the growth process. 4. Enact how sandstone is formed.

I’m pounding the desk and snorting, but wait, there’s more! 

5. Create vital organs linked to one another and ask one member to be a drop of blood circulating through the system. Ask the drop of blood to non-verbally interact with organs to establish their function with the drop of blood. 6. Enact the formation of the Grand Canyon. SHARE

My hysterical laughter unnerves the TA; I apologize for disrupting her computer game and continue to pound the desk while screeching. Outside the building the sunlight suddenly withdraws, and a group of short football players in squash yellow jerseys and brown pants fades against the gravel practice field. Heavy gray clouds loom between the oleanders which border the building and the low roof overhang outside.

All empires eventually fall, but the American Empire will be the first to be destroyed by psychologists.

The New Modern Man Speaks for Himself / Unedited; No Comments

The New Modern Man Website:

The Truth About Women and The World | Politically Incorrect Facts and Analysis for Men

The Five Male Archetypes / Listed in order of sexual success with women

Roughly, 20% of men are Alphas, Sigmas and top tier Betas, while the bottom 80% are other Betas, Gammas, and Omegas. We see the 80/20 rule time and time again in nature and the world, in business it is known as the Pareto Principle, and it applies to the Social-Sexual Hierarchy, too. Let’s elaborate a little more on the hierarchy.

Alphas

Alphas cannot walk outside without falling into puss. The Alpha is the center of male and female attention. Women are uncontrollably drawn to the Alpha primarily because of his social status. Women would rather be part of the harem of an Alpha than the one and only of a Johnny 9-to-5 Beta or lower male in the hierarchy. Women justify the selfish and often horrible decisions they make when in the company of Alphas with their built-in Rationalization Hamster. Estimates vary widely, but the Alpha has at least 30-40, if not hundreds of sexual partners over his lifetime.

Sigmas

The introverted version of the Alpha. Sigmas are also very successful with women even though the idea of being the center of attention repulses them. They are Lone Wolfs and bad boys who do not play along with the usual, ridiculous social games. Estimates vary, but the Sigma has at least 30-40 sexual partners over his lifetime, but Greater Sigma notch counts can easily reach over 100 as well.

Betas

Betas tend to fumble when it comes to dealing with women. They are underappreciated and make up the majority hardworking and honest men in society. Betas do all the important work of the society but are not valued by their government or women. Betas are the source of most of the tax money used to power Uncle Sugar’s gynocentric welfare state. They can be attractive and charming, sometimes not. But as we all know social or financial status, not physical attractiveness, is everything to the female. Betas are usually kept around by women for their resources, which is why their power is diminishing in today’s sexual market. Often, a woman will have a Beta so she can spend his money while fucking an Alpha or Sigma on the side. Betas are also used and abused as well as enslaved by the family court system in America. When dating, Betas often have long dry spells in which they get no sexual action. Over their lifetime, a rough estimate is they will end up with 5-15 sexual partners.

Gamma

Gammas either have no idea how vicious the sexual market is, or they become embittered by it. Gammas are either emotionally needy or do not know how to stand up to women. They can be infested with a severe case of pedestalization syndrome. Rather than adapting to harsh realities, they blame the Game for their unhappiness instead of becoming a player in it. Gammas get lucky with maybe a handful of women in their lives. Women would rather end up as the Cat Lady than marry or pursue a Long Term Relationship with a Gamma.

Omega

Omega males tend to be very awkward with women. They have little to no social status, so they are completely invisible to women. Their powerlessness in the sexual market often leads to psychological problems and indeed many of the recent mass shootings can be tied to men who were of this lowest status, as well as the medical establishment’s attempts to profit off their misery by drugging them. Needless to say, Rosy Palm and porn are their best friends. Women are repulsed by the Omega. Lifetime notch counts are in the single digits, if that.

Upward Mobility

Just because a man is born one type does not mean he has to stay that type. Improvement begins with I. Learning the Laws of Game and Laws of Hypergamy will help enormously. Realize women do not love men the way men love women. Even an Omega can adapt his mind to exploit the biology and psychology of women and become more successful in plundering poon. Likewise, a Beta can stop being a walking wallet when he learns either how to play the Game or to let women’s hypergamous instincts work for him.

These concepts are not for everyone. If you haven’t already, make the decision as to whether you want to take the Red Pill or the Blue Pill. The New Modern Man and the rest of the manosphere is written by and for those who swallow the jagged little pill of reality.

Help us grow by making a purchase from our Recommended Reading and Viewing page or our Politically Incorrect Apparel and Merchandise page or buy anything from Amazon using this link. You can also Sponsor The New Modern Man for as little as $1 a month.