Any actual Psychologists or Psychology students here?

[Anonymous No.18913051]

Suggest me an entry level book for psychology? Every book I've previously tried on the subject turned out to be popsci and has a few reviews by people claiming to be psychologists stating that the author made up shit and his studies and can't be replicated. What books do you guys actually read? I don't mind if they're text books, just post them, please?

[Anonymous No.18913112]

A Primer of Freudian Psychology
A Primer of Jungian Psychology

[Anonymous No.18913149]

>>18913112
Thanks. What after that?

[Anonymous No.18913158]

>>18913149
idk bro I haven't made it that far

[Anonymous No.18913339]

>>18913158
Oh well... Thanks either way.

[Anonymous No.18913361]

>>18913051
>Psychology
>Freud pic
):
The Principles of Psychology - William James

[Anonymous No.18913366]

>>18913051
Piaget’s Psychology of the Child is a seminal text and still widely referenced within the discipline.

[Anonymous No.18913416]

>>18913361
Well, I never claimed that I understood psychology. And whether you like it or not posting Freud is a good way to draw attention to a Psychology thread for the anons that are just casually browsing the catalog.

[Anonymous No.18913439]

>>18913416
You're right man, sorry for being rude. Just hate that pseud bastard

[Anonymous No.18913446]

>>18913439
Nah, that's fine. Thanks for the rec.

[Anonymous No.18913454]

>>18913361
>>18913439
Not OP, but what's your opinion on Jung?

[Anonymous No.18913469]

>>18913454
Same as Freud. Two very different turds are still turds

[Anonymous No.18913513]

>>18913469
Then what are some psychologists you recommend reading.

[Anonymous No.18913704]

>>18913361
Freud is only controversial if you're a dumbass, his fundamentals are the go-to for modern psychology.

[Anonymous No.18913743]

>>18913051
is there a university where you live? go to the university library. find the psychology section. at the start of the section there should be some big fat textbooks on psychology. inside those textbooks will be recommendations for what to read.

[Anonymous No.18914049]

The Varieties of Religious Experience - William James

A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance - Leon Festinger

The Psychopathology of Everyday Life - Sigmund Freud

The Rape of the Mind - Joost Meerloo

The Anatomy of Dependence - Takeo Doi

Beyond Freedom & Dignity - B.F Skinner

Research in Psychology: Methods & Design - Goodwin

The Social Animal - Elliot Aronson

[Anonymous No.18914064]

From Oxford

[Anonymous No.18914086]

>>18914049
>The Rape of the Mind - Joost Meerloo
Sounds spicy.

[Anonymous No.18914120]

Psychology undergrad here. Read on the many foundational psychologists of the 20th century, where it officially became institutionalized, before beginning with modern schools as it has been bifurcated rather retardedly, I should say, following the influx of the post-structuralist schism. My school does not even mention these people, but personally, I've read:

William James (Henry is ripe too for psychological exegesis, if you're into that)
Fechner
Bleuler
Brentano
Pavlov
von Helmholtz
Janet
Sechenov
Wundt
Skinner
Freud and the subsequent psychoanalytic school (Alder, Jung, Lacan, etc.)
Psychoanalyst who deviated from Freud's doctrine such as Reich, Otto Rank, etc.

[Anonymous No.18914203]

>>18913051
The following texts are used in gateway courses (they're 2nd year so they serve as a general introduction toward specialization).

>Sensation & Perception (Wolfe, Kluender, Levi)
>Human Development (Kail, Cavanaugh, Ateah)
>Abnormal Psychology (Nolen-Hoeksema, Rector)
>Learning and Memory (Gluck, Mercado, Myers)

Pic is the text Jordan Peterson used for his section of Personality of Personality. It's honestly a great textbook but it's dense (and out of print...I got my copy for $8 on amazon instead of shelling out the $300 licensed version Peterson used). Some of my books are in storage (e.g. I'm missing my Bioloigcal/Anatomy text...but you're probably more interested in the less sciency stuff anyway).

We used Historical and Philosophical Foundations of Psychology (Farrell) for a 4th-year seminar I took...it's very light and you'll probably find it interesting (you should d/l or pick that one up to start with).

The first-year survey text I had was Psychology: Themes & Variations (Weiten, McCann). It's decent but probably too broad for your interests.

If you want a comprehensive intro to the field, go with the 2nd year ones above. If you want a general/philosophical intro, go with (pic) and Farrell. If you want a really broad intro with the various subfields available check out the first year text. (Note: Stay away from social psychology shit because it's mostly nonsense).

[Anonymous No.18914248]

>>18914203
FYI: Those texts compose about 1/2 of a psych degree (but they're the first half and you're missing the supplemental and primary source readigs).

I think the Rychlak and Farrell texts are what you're looking for (again, the Farrell one is a very easy read; the book from Peterson's course is dense and a little dry--but it's great...I'll snap a photo of the table of contents later if you're interested--you can see such for the Farrell book on amazon).

[Anonymous No.18914249]

>>18914203
>Note: Stay away from social psychology shit because it's mostly nonsense
Hey, noob psychology major here. Took a class on social psych and it honestly seemed really interesting. The textbook I read (social psychology by Elliot aronson) seemed pretty well written and included a variety of experiments that seemed legit, besides some of the older experiments which had flaws that have been pointed out in modern work. Can I ask why you say this? Genuinely just curious; I don’t know enough about it to speak on it, but I would rather steer away from it if what you said is the case. Is it because of the replicability crisis?

[Anonymous No.18914277]

>>18914249
>Is it because of the replicability crisis?
Largely yes. I'm pretty sure that Social Psychology is the epitome of the replication crisis (I mean that statistically...I'd have to research the %age of studies relative to other fields).

Aside from that, social psych is basically a gateway into indoctrination. The models used are bunk and based largely on ideology. Now, that's not to say there isn't interesting research that's been done in the past nor is it to say that you won't learn anything by a survey of that subfield. However, all of the criticisms against academia that have come to light within the last decade are front and centre when it comes to that discipline.

[Anonymous No.18914290]

>>18914277
Ah, I see. Thanks for replying. May I ask what specialization of psychology you are in/studied?

[Anonymous No.18914304]

>>18914290
I finished a BSc (my other major was math). I also took a minor in History & Philosophy of Science and Technology (which was pretty great). I fucked off out of academia and started a career (my original intent was to get into psychometrics but I decided to work and start my life in an unrelated field).

Good luck in your studies.

[Anonymous No.18914334]

Go read the last psychiatrist

[Anonymous No.18914585]

Bump

[Anonymous No.18914597]

>>18913051
Get a regular intro textbook, anon
https://opensyllabus.org/
You are welcome.

[Anonymous No.18914702]

>>18914064
Yikes

[Anonymous No.18914804]

>>18913051
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/9977372-introduction-to-psychology?ac=1&from_search=true&qid=rnsHeNnZAk&rank=1
This was the first book that we read in our psych undergraduate program

[Anonymous No.18914808]

[Anonymous No.18914822]

>>18913416
freud is retarded

psychology is low tier, not even gonna call it a science. everything a psych major learns is common sense. a psych major is worthless
go study a real science.

every girl at my college
>OH YEAH PSYCH IS JUST REALLY COOL, IM REALLY INTO FIGURING PEOPLE OUT AND LIKE PICKING THEIR PERSONALITIES APART HEHE. HEHEHEHEHEEHEAREHAEHRASDFHASDHAGSDFHGSDFGHSDFGSHDFGSIDFGSD

[Anonymous No.18914859]

>>18914808
He's talking about Psychiatry, though. I think even Psychologists hate Psychiatry.

[Anonymous No.18914869]

>>18914822
>freud is retarded
Smarter than you will ever be in your entire life.
>psychology is low tier, not even gonna call it a science. everything a psych major learns is common sense. a psych major is worthless
Hasty generalization fallacy coming from a person who has no idea what they are talking about.
>go study a real science.
Psychology: science of mind and behavior.
>every girl at my college
>>OH YEAH PSYCH IS JUST REALLY COOL, IM REALLY INTO FIGURING PEOPLE OUT AND LIKE PICKING THEIR PERSONALITIES APART HEHE. HEHEHEHEHEEHEAREHAEHRASDFHASDHAGSDFHGSDFGHSDFGSHDFGSIDFGSD
Another hasty generalization. Cope and seethe.

[Anonymous No.18914873]

>>18914822
Its not so much as it not being a real science but that exploring real science is not being incentivized. Psychology as a discipline is in its infancy and did not go through a long period of time where people could have experimented and theorized out of a sense of genuine interest and not based off of ideological reasons. There were people like Skinner who studied behaviorism as it was a cold hard science where anything which was not observable was irrelevant. It could have been great but because of its capacity to easily sway the masses it has now been reduced to its current state. This can be improved to a great extent if we just take women out of the discipline or at best confine them to being counselors in schools.

[Anonymous No.18914877]

>>18914869
yeah ok psued, have fun spending 4 years learning nothing while proper majors learn more than you could ever comprehend in a semester

[Anonymous No.18914889]

>>18914869
>wah wah, youre generalizing, pwees stop generalizing wah wah

nigga thats all it is

[Anonymous No.18914899]

>>18914877
So is it of your opinion that we simply shouldn’t study the mind and behavior? If psychology is common sense than why don’t you know anything about it?

[Anonymous No.18914909]

>>18914822
Undergraduate psych hoes aren’t and can’t consider themselves psychologists, you need a masters + PhD to be a psychologist.

[Anonymous No.18914913]

>>18913051
Read picrel. Espicially chapter 9.

[Anonymous No.18914917]

>>18914899
go into neuroscience or neurobiology and actually learn something about the brain lol.

i think some people need to study behavior, sociologists sure. but do we need retards like you going to college for it? no
do we need 1 billion girls who take Vyvansese and complain about their adhd everyday doing it
no
probably too complicated for you

[Anonymous No.18914922]

I studied psychology for only one semester and after seeing the kind of people who went to that damn career I don't plan to go back to that depressing place, with pseudo intellectuals who don't know what to do with their lives and only chose psychology because they hadn't thought about what to do with their damn lives before.
Leaving that aside, for an introduction to psychology I recommend the book Psychology: An Introduction by Charles Morris. It will introduce you to the discipline, pointing out some concepts, the most important schools and their origins. In the future I personally recommend that you take a look at psychologists like Vygotsky.

[Anonymous No.18914926]

>>18914917
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuropsychology?wprov=sfti1

[Anonymous No.18914930]

>>18914926
thats the sped class bruther

[Anonymous No.18915006]

>>18913051
You can tour acute care facilities. Get out there and experience real psychosis and schizoaffective disorders for yourself. Behavioral Hospitals are always hiring. Witness the Cycle of Abuse first-hand, then evaluate the efficacy of treatment. In my facility, most children are hyper-aggressive and sexually maladaptive, most adolescents are BPD and SI, most adults are Substance Abuse and HI. These are very real, very immediate behaviors and conditions that warrant treatment (for their safety and the safety of others, hence detention status). Theory is nice (Freud, Skinner), but clinicals are always infinitely more valuable for anyone that's actually keen on interacting with others (Kanner, Straus/Kreisman). If you're after evaluative works, I'd start with Cronbach/Meehl. If you want something a bit more contentious, Lee Jussim's work on stereotype accuracy is worth a look.

[Anonymous No.18915110]

Any good books on children with neglectful parents, or troubled households? I come from a broken family with a druggie cheater mom and a neglectful boomer dad who never talks about his emotions. I want to read these types of books to hopefully learn more on how I've been affected by such neglect and how to to face it

[Anonymous No.18915157]

>>18915110
Albert Bandura: Social Foundations of Thought and Action (1986); read it with Sapolsky's Behave (2017). If you want a general-purpose (and outdated) overview:
https://www.nap.edu/read/2117/chapter/1

[Anonymous No.18915294]

>>18914702
Why?

[Anonymous No.18915357]

All psychology is bs imo but if you really wanted to go back and start from the beginning, Kant's critique of pure reason and critique of judgement started all this shit.

[Anonymous No.18915395]

>>18915006
Are diagnostic personality disorder tests valid in the long run?

[Anonymous No.18915446]

>>18913112
Psymd here, don't start with these books. Don't start eith pretentious outdated knowledge.
Read "Psychology" by Bjorklund as a primer together with "psychological research - the ideas behind the methods."

[Anonymous No.18915466]

>>18915446
Follow with "An Introduction to Developmental Psychology"
By Alan Slater and "Cognitive Psychology" by Gilhooly. Then you've read the first few months of a first year psychology student.
This gives you a good starting point to integrate more knowledge about psychology.

[Anonymous No.18915514]

If you ever want illustrated that you most posts here are made by people that recommend books they have never read and by people that have very strong opinions about things they haven't spent time researching, just read a thread on a subject you specialize in.

I'm about to head out but I'll just write some quick stuff as an actual psychologist in training (5 years, not what I think Americans would call a "minor").

>>18915357
>All psychology is bs imo but if you really wanted to go back and start from the beginning, Kant's critique of pure reason and critique of judgement started all this shit.

Case in point, psychology is a very broad subject and only someone who doesn't actually know much about the subject would write something like "all psychology is bs". I implore this person to even just read the Wikipedia article or whatever on psychology. I realize this person without realizing it is probably thinking about psychiatry, but that just illustrates my point and even then the same applies. Psychiatry should be and constantly is challenged, but that doesn't mean it hasn't been extremely important for lots of people. This might shock some of you, but a decent chunk of this psychiatry is done by way of psychodynamic therapy.

>>18914859
>He's talking about Psychiatry, though. I think even Psychologists hate Psychiatry.

Maybe some do, but there is a lot of overlap. Many psychologists work in psychiatry.

>>18913704
>Freud is only controversial if you're a dumbass, his fundamentals are the go-to for modern psychology.

Maybe in an extremely broad sense since Freud shined a spotlight on the unconscious, but even so this statement is inaccurate. Many working psychologists focus on observable behavior, especially what you would call "modern" professionals. The psychologists you find working based on the theories of Freud will be primarily the older generations. The dominant focus of psychology, or modern if you will, is behavioristic and cognitive.

>>18915446
>>18914804
>>18914203
Good recommendations. "Learning and Behavior" by Bouton is also absolutely stellar.

[Anonymous No.18915537]

>>18915514
What are the current trends in psychology? Any major breakthroughs?

[Anonymous No.18915614]

>>18915514
>I'm about to head out
Post some books before you do?

[Anonymous No.18915638]

>>18915514
What's your opinion of Peterson, strictly speaking of Psychology?

[Anonymous No.18916406]

Bump.

[Anonymous No.18916421]

:)

[Anonymous No.18916521]

>>18916421
Thanks. Link?

[Anonymous No.18916571]

[Anonymous No.18916604]

Take the behaviorismpill, OP. Real picrel, or read BF Skinner's books. Also read The Myth of Mental Illness by Thomas Szasz.

Behavior, unlike many of the conceptual models that psychology relies on, is observable and measurable. I'm really glad I learned about it because it comes up constantly in my day to day life.

[Anonymous No.18916712]

>>18913051
>Suggest me an entry level book for psychology?
Pro tip, prepare to dedicate a good two months or so reading ANY psychology book. A couple of years ago, I fell into the whole Jung meme, and decided id read some of his books, considering they're only about 300 pages long, it can't be that bad right?

It took me 3 months to finish one of his book. Real good, mind you, but damn, it was a huge effort to do considering I was only doing it for fun.

[Anonymous No.18916724]

lol

[Anonymous No.18916750]

>>18914064
truly abominable list EXCEPT for the Bental & Beck one which i highly recommend

[Anonymous No.18916864]

>>18916750
Why?

[Anonymous No.18916920]

>>18916724
The duality of lit

[Anonymous No.18917032]

>>18916920
Fuck niggers.

[Anonymous No.18917217]

>>18916604
behaviorism is soulless

[Anonymous No.18917427]

>>18915514
What area of psychology are you in?

[Anonymous No.18917660]

>>18915638
I'm the anon who had him as a prof.

First, he's worked for decades as a clinical psychologist. He's had a tangible impact on the lives of countless people on a person-person level.

Second, he's produced valuable research as an academic. (We had to read some of the stuff he wrote on addictions (alcoholism) in class).

Third, the Peterson you see online isn't the same person as he was as a professor. He has become a talking head. (FYI: Half of his personality course, the technical part, isn't even online).

All that being said Peterson does promote some questionable beliefs. If you want a decent academic treatment of the darker side of his key influences, check out pic.

Bonus anecdote: Peterson told us to read The Bell Curve. It was during a lecture from the second half of the course that isn't online. He said that racial disparities in IQ mean that social programmes (e.g. affirmative action) aren't targeted correctly and won't help people who actually need help. I always expected this to come up and sink his public career as a talking head but it hasn't happened.

[Anonymous No.18917858]

>>18917217
*Behaviorism is scientific

Either way, psychology as a whole is soulless. The only reason people single out behaviorism is because they're deluded enough to think that the medicalization of the entire human experience will somehow answer the questions about living well that people have spent thousands of years trying to address. It won't.

[Anonymous No.18917951]

>>18917660
>the darker side of his key influences
Can you elaborate about the book? Is it going to argue Jung and Eliade were fascists that must be canceled?

[Anonymous No.18918303]

>>18916604
>>18917217
Go read the first chapter of Watson's "Behaviorism". Literal reddit atheist but from the 1920s. At least Freud understood that "there's something there" despite his atheism, probably because he wasn't a full autist like Watson and Skinner.

[Anonymous No.18918677]

>>18913051
>daily reminder that psychology is the actual number one threat to universal and mental freedom

[Anonymous No.18918695]

>>18917951
Facist and anti semites who must be canceled. Using the very strong argument of; "Nazis breathed air (used myth) and so did he!"

[Anonymous No.18918802]

>>18915006
>and conditions that warrant treatment (for their safety and the safety of others, hence detention status).
this is what the police do, this should be in no possible and rational way an explanation of psychological illness. its specially brilliant the "for their safety", when you are the one who decide what is their safety. creepy and totalitarian but if psychology/psychiatry is science then there is not totalitarianism in the heads of people. also, if you want to kick the ass of someone who say this is an illness?, but if you feel empathy for him, or if you feel indifference by him then you are right. my point: psychology is based in assumptions about what is good and bad and then enforce it. casually it almost always coincide with what is good and bad socially at the time.
>>18915514
>Case in point, psychology is a very broad subject
now you go and say aristotle was the first psychologist. or dostoievski have psychological themes. come on. when people talk about psychology/psychiatry (they are the same, just two branches with the same goal) they talk about the institutionalization of it. the enforcement, the arbiters of "mental health", the one we are living it now. even with all the schools that can be the institution remains the same. that is what people refer when they say "all psychology is xxxx"

[Anonymous No.18919033]

>>18918802
>psychology is based in assumptions about what is good and bad and then enforce it. casually it almost always coincide with what is good and bad socially at the time.

I'm a practicing therapist. I can tell you are not, because our training emphasizes exactly the opposite of this. Clients get to describe their goals and their barriers. It's then a therapist's job to help explore the reasons for the existence of these barriers and ways around them. There's no grand conspiracy to socialize people for society's benefit or turn people into "normies" or whatever people think.

As to answer the thread question. Dale Carnegie's "How to win friends and influence people" and "How to stop worrying and start living" are books I use almost daily with clients. These books are easy to digest and solve most problems relating to relationship difficulties and anxiety.

I'm actually surprised to see so many recommend books on theory in this thread. Theory is great and all, but it's never very practical for day to day use. If you want to see what its like to be a counselor or psychotherapist, you can pick up a copy of "The Complete Adult Psychotherapy Treatment Planner" by Jongsma. Which is a list of techniques used to treat common disorders.

[Anonymous No.18919133]

Bump

[Anonymous No.18919193]

>>18919033
if a guy go telling you his goal is to make people feel miserable you try to change him or you help him to make his goals?. psychology have a set of what is good and bad. i dont ever try to questioning it. people go to your therapies knowing more or less what set of rules you represent, so you usually dont even have this kind of conflicts.
for example, why depression is something bad?, usually mundane psychologists like you (sophisticated psychologist are worst and make more damage, i dont try to save them) say with a straight and serious face that depressed people cant live a "normal life" and they can even lose their jobs (real arguments of true psychologists with large numbers of clients). they really think this is an argument.

>dale carnegie
only this should make you questioning what are you doing with your life. you are literally encouraging phonyness in people. this is the problem of people going to another people to resolve their lives. dumb guiding dumb.

[Anonymous No.18919237]

>>18914822
>not even gonna call it a science
I agree, calling psychology a science is doing it a disservice

[Anonymous No.18919242]

>>18919237
except for the psychologists. they are pretty happy with that.

[Anonymous No.18919252]

>>18919242
If they are, they're idiots. I know I am not.
To call psychology a science is to force a square peg into a round hole. It's not a science and neither it is philosophy. It's something else entirely.
t. psych master's

[Anonymous No.18919309]

>>18919252
if you put in every psychology and psychiatry office "this is not a science", and you say it in the tv and in all possible places till the public understand it. literally your clients drop to the point of you being a new age therapist more.
>psychs never gonna drop the term science of them, its the only validity they have.

[Anonymous No.18919326]

>>18919309
>literally your clients drop to the point of you being a new age therapist more.
Good riddance. I abandoned psychology btw, didn't want to be part of it. Still, the knowledge remains, and I value it.
>>psychs never gonna drop the term science of them, its the only validity they have.
Yes.
But it's also on the society that doesn't value wisdom anymore. The role of psychologists was performed by holy men once. It was a better time, I think.

[Anonymous No.18919373]

>>18918303
Did Freud really think that? Where can I find more about this belief of his? I’m asking because I see in Freud a very mystical force that one could find in Boehme, Sade, Schopenhauer, Nietzsche and most of his theories are very compatible with christian anthropology, the purely sexual volitions and all its deviations as expression of reality of man.

[Anonymous No.18919374]

>>18919326
>The role of psychologists was performed by holy men once. It was a better time, I think.
how many holy men can be in one time and place?. this role was always made by religious burocrats. by followers of an specific line. as psychologists do now. its a too elevated role in a way. humans are humans.

[Anonymous No.18919592]

bruom

[Anonymous No.18919610]

>>18913704
Said nobody ever

[Anonymous No.18920030]

>>18913051
test

[Anonymous No.18920142]

>>18913051
for psychoanalysis-if you're interested in source material for Freud, I'd start with Civilizations and its Discontents--it's an older Freud that's applying his ideas to broader society. Avoid "Beyond the Pleasure Principal" at first as it is a conflicted work that won't mean much if you're not familiar with Freud's oscillations over his lifetime

>>18914822
for instance, this is a great example of projection

[Anonymous No.18920239]

>>18913051
>Any actual Psychology students here?
Yeah, what kind of things do you want to read/learn about? I've personally avoided behaviorism and psychoanalysis, for the most part. I read a primer on Pavlov by Jeffrey Gray early on in my studies and Freud's Civilization and its Discontents. For the most of part, cognitive development, humanistic approaches to psychotherapy, epistemology, social dynamics, and memetics have been of interest to me. Not that I hold adept knowledge in these topics, rather my education is still in its infancy. Most of it has occurred out of uni, but now I'm officially studying it instead of being an autodidact with nothing to do with the information I've come across.

As I learn more about the field, the concept if psychology sort of loses its meaning in the same way that biology does as you explore it. The fields are so vast that it really serves to become interdisciplinary in your knowledge, focusing less on specializing on topics and developing a sophisticated generalist toolkit. That's sort of why I've tried to incorporate the complexity sciences and biology into my education.

If you want to read something that is broader, yet still source material, instead of someone else's compilation, then I'd recommend these:
>Psychology and Epistemology: Towards a Theory of Knowledge - Jean Piaget
>Motivation and Personality - Abraham Maslow
Here's a copy: https://archive.org/details/ilhem_20150321/mode/2up
>On Becoming a Person - Carl Rogers

I think these books were very influential to my thinking.

>>18913366
I think that book is great, but if you've read Piaget's earlier material, the book leaves out plenty of information and is awfully brief. As difficult as Piaget's writings are, mostly because the translations from French are a little rough, and due to how fragmented they are, I think reading the original texts are well worth it. Ginsburg and Opper's primer: "Piaget's Theory of Intellectual Development" is also a decent companion to your suggestion if sifting through his earlier works seems too daunting.

[Anonymous No.18920301]

Look through these pages OP. It gives you a brief tour of a variety of topics and classics in psychology:
https://psychclassics.yorku.ca/topic.htm

[Anonymous No.18920345]

>>18920301
Nice one, thanks anon

[Anonymous No.18920704]

>>18920239
Are you studying psychology in university? If so, what do you think about the replicability crisis within the field as of now? I am currently a psych major who hopes to eventually get my masters and PhD and can’t help but feel discouraged the more I read about psychology’s current crisis. I am thinking about minoring in neuroscience as well, but will need to greatly improve my math, biology, and chemistry skills (on my own) before attempting those classes, as I fucked around a lot during high school and want to build a solid foundation in those areas prior. Any methods to learn math, chem, and bio on your own would be appreciated as well; I was just going to buy a bunch of cheap textbooks and work my way through them during my spare time.

[Anonymous No.18920708]

>>18920142
>for instance, this is a great example of projection
you are projecting too.

[Anonymous No.18920737]

>>18920239
people study psychology because they want to have a better knowledge of the "mind"?. or because they want to "help" people?.

[Anonymous No.18920967]

>>18920737
A clinical psychologist would want to help people. An experimental psychologist would want to study the mind.

[Anonymous No.18921005]

>>18919193
>If a guy says he wants to make peoe miserable
Not a therapist, my mom was. When someone comes in with a questionable goal like this (it is quiestionable because it will make him at odds with society and therefore lead to more suffering for him, most of the times) a good therapist tries to understand what is the root cause. Is it a will to power? Confidence? Base sadism? If it is base sadism then yes, not all therapists will help you self actualize in that direction, but some will.

[Anonymous No.18921021]

>>18919252
Can you elaborate?

[Anonymous No.18921052]

>>18921005
my point was that psychologists dont listen in a blank slate.
>but some will
maybe some wacko hippy oldschool psychoanalyst. a professional psychologist?. i doubt it very very much.

[Anonymous No.18921132]

>society: oh, Brave New World, what an insightful and brilliant dystopian novel.
>also society: antidepressant are necessary and harmless.
why people are so dumb?.

[Anonymous No.18921150]

I was about to train as a Jungian analyst, spent years in analysis and years studying psychoanalysis and depth psychology in grad school. I discovered homeopathy and there's no going back. Homeopathy contains a more accurate psychology than either Freud or Jung and can actually serve to correct imbalances on all levels of one's being. Read Edward Whitmont and you'll see.

[Anonymous No.18921266]

>>18920239
>>18915514
I'd like to approach this topic with a more open mind, and I agree that some of what Freud argues is iffy ("dude the only reason you disagree with me is because of ego defenses lmao"), but much of my experience in treatment is that modern methods don't really work (for me). I agree, the criticisms oftentimes are too general and not well-enough researched to warrant attention. But reading a whole lot of books about practices that don't help me isn't useful. I disregard the field because I've been failed, not because I have any particular critical engagement with it.

[Anonymous No.18921287]

>>18913051
Most of psychology, and social sciences in general, are just unreplicable popsci, just skip it and read about neuroscience, behavioral economics or microeconomics

[Anonymous No.18921580]

>>18921287
>behavioral economics
Books?

[Anonymous No.18921690]

>>18921287
Disgusting. True psychology is the study of the soul. You won't find that in your materialist fantasy world.

[Anonymous No.18921750]

>>18921580
>Behavioral Economics: The Basics
Good as an introduction but is mostly a textbook
>Misbehaving: The Making of Behavioral Economics
also an intro but has more of a narrative to it
>Irrational Exuberance
>Nudge
>Predictably Irrational
All good but can get too close to popsci at times

[Anonymous No.18921784]

>>18921750
Thanks. But please mention the Authors, too many books with similar titles

[Anonymous No.18921831]

>>18913051
Sophocles

[Anonymous No.18921875]

>>18921784
Richard Thaller, Robert Shiller, Dan Ariely would be the usual recommendations

[Anonymous No.18921940]

Does your character really change once you get insight in your subconsciousness?

[Anonymous No.18921945]

>>18921940
If you don't like what you find you can try your best to resist. Self-control goes a long way, but you'll be fighting every day.

[Anonymous No.18921955]

>>18921945
Im not talking about finding what you dont like but rather "realizing" why you've been doing something for years. It seems like it doesnt do much on itself and can be easily ignored if not used as an excuse.

[Anonymous No.18921961]

>>18921940
Yes. Unlike what this faggot said >>18921945 once I found out what was in there I started to hedonistically indulge in it without restraint and with a total sense of purpose. This has had a such a profound positive psychological impact on my character, that now I only ever do what I want. Life is beautiful

[Anonymous No.18922269]

>>18921875
Thanks.

[Anonymous No.18922448]

>>18921955
"Realizing" on an intellectual level does nothing. Seeing it and understanding the way you've been blind all your life is akin to enlightenment, changes your life.
Does your life physically change? No. After you're enlightened you go back to doing the same thing. But your outlook and view is completely different.

[Anonymous No.18922786]

>>18920704
>Are you studying psychology in university?
Yes, I'm currently half way through the process it seems.

>>18920704
>If so, what do you think about the replicability crisis within the field as of now?
I think it's a great tragedy, but peer review as a system is awfully flawed anyway. Even if there wasn't a replication crisis, the incentive structures for research are all off due to monetary influence and grant proposal dynamics, which distorts the types of ideas people research. I think there are deep, fundamental problems with how all of these systems, even academia in general, are set up that makes a replication crisis inevitable. Going through intro classes, when you learn all the flashy studies that garner the most attention like Zimbardo's prison experiment, or Milgram's experiments, then digging a little deeper and finding out that their standing is contentious and relatively shaky is rather disappointing seeing how they are presented in textbooks with such confidence. If you ever take a Research Methods class you'll quickly realize how heavily regulated everything is, which in a way, is important inasmuch as unethical studies should be avoided (like if you wanted to study cognitive development by isolating children from all social contact deliberately, although there was that one study with kittens and embodied cognition), but overall, I believe that there are too many constraints on research, monetary, regulatory, or otherwise.

Here are some variables that probably contribute to the problem:
>obstructionist peer reviewers
>financial incentives tilting research into particular directions (i.e., big grants for big studies, less theoretical stuff, etc.)
>some professors try to maintain tenure by replicating the most basic research that's been studied loads of times already
>statistical knowledge as a whole is relatively weak
>bachelors degrees revolve around too much rote memorization and test taking instead of applied knowledge and critical thinking
>too few people try to link disciplines together in order to broaden understanding
>too many people specialize in minute areas of research just to hold a domain that makes them useful/irreplaceable
>our knowledge of how the brain actually functions is too low to truly create worthwhile experiments
>PhD programs are awfully competitive, yet some of them don't even require to generate your own original research (this is a problem in other fields too)

It's a bit of a grim outlook, but the problems are way bigger than just psychology and attempting to change it seems intractable.

>Any methods to learn math, chem, and bio on your own would be appreciated as well
For chemistry look into this site by UC Davis it's quite useful (clicking on the side tab that says "Libraries" gives you access to other fields as well):
>https://chem.libretexts.org/
For biology, I'll always recommend Sapolsky's Stanford lecture series:
>https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL848F2368C90DDC3D

[Anonymous No.18922899]

>>18920737
I dislike this binary. In order to help people you need to understand the mind well enough to facilitate progress. Obviously a researcher would want to further the fields collective understanding, but Rogers who was mostly an applied psychotherapist, contributed a lot on the theoretical level, and helped spawn studies exploring his methods of therapy and active listening.

[Anonymous No.18923121]

>>18922899
would you agree that labeling a patient as mentally ill excuses him from taking responsibility and puts him in a passive recipient role?

[Anonymous No.18923445]

>>18923121
Yeah, I believe labeling introduces a risk of helplessness and dependency in those who are rigidly categorized. Obviously this invokes discussions regarding the degree to which we have agentic control over our own lives, the risk/benefit ratio of diagnoses, and the role of clients within a therapeutic framework. I'd argue that labeling someone as mentally ill is likely to spur a form of learned helplessness, but an accurate diagnosis of a particular disorder with a built in strategy to bolster strengths, while mitigating obstacles is probably a boon rather than a hinderance. It would be very distressing to navigate a world with an underlying psychological problem that is unknown to you; the confusion would be immense upon failing to do things that others seem to do naturally. This assumes we are talking about disorders that are weak enough to allow for self-awareness in those who are afflicted. Knowing that something specific is mismatched with your current environment means, hopefully, that one can optimize their own performance, deficiencies and all, to operate effectively. This is especially the case when discussing modern disorders like ADHD and dyslexia that exist mostly within the context of modern society (not to say that they're not real, but rather human diversity/variability seems to be less tolerated within our current western systems).

Depending on the severity, there's a scope of responsibility that, in my view becomes more acute as the severity increases, meaning less responsibility is placed on those who are really out there. That's why, for those who do have a decent level control over their actions, the support network around them (if they are able to find one), should work closely to fortify self-sufficient individuals. I think that self-awareness training, if it's possible foster such a concept, is important.

[Anonymous No.18923537]

>>18922786
fuck. the problem is not in science and his methods but in the dubious concept of human mind as an empirical field of study. your post make a good strong dr mengele vibes.
>>18922899
the medical envision of psychology/psychiatry is an error since the beginning and is the big anchor that make almost impossible any advancement because it have a flawed premise. you cant have any flaw in behaviour without a social "normality" of what a behaviour is. this is so simple, so completely stupidly simple that psychology goes decades and decades behind his own tail trying to explain why depression is really something bad because is bad for the development of the person without never questioning what is the development of a person and how mixing an empirical discipline with this kind of things its an authentic mess that can only end in reinforcing the same premises. basically human mind, attitudes, fantasy and thoughts should remain free.

[Anonymous No.18923572]

>>18913704
>Freud is only controversial if you're a dumbass, his fundamentals are the go-to for modern psychology.

Freud was a coke-addled litterateur mauvais.

[Anonymous No.18923589]

>>18915514
>Maybe in an extremely broad sense since Freud shined a spotlight on the unconscious

There is no unconscious, it is a contradiction in essence, as Brentano exposed. What can be the representational value of a representation that is not being represented?

[Anonymous No.18923868]

>>18923589
>Brentano
midwit aristotelian

[Anonymous No.18924116]

>>18923589
kek imagine believing that.

[Anonymous No.18924133]

Bump

[Anonymous No.18924144]

>>18924116
Explain to me how an unrepresented representation can influence me.
Be specific about the mechanism it employs. How can an idea I am not thinking about, which is not a secondary representation to my primary one, can have any action on my ideation?

[Anonymous No.18924948]

>>18924144
>which is not a secondary representation to my primary one
what exactly mean this?.

[Anonymous No.18924981]

>>18924948
It means he's retarded

[Anonymous No.18925823]

>>18913051
Psychology is like Economics, no one actually knows what's correct and what's not.

[Anonymous No.18925942]

>>18925823
economics dont have economy wards to teach you economy.

[Anonymous No.18925967]

>>18925942
Psych wards aren't educational institutions either

[Anonymous No.18925995]

>>18925967
what they do in a psych ward then?. they teach you their knowing of "your" thoughts. thats why psychology and psychiatry are so dangerous.

[Anonymous No.18926050]

>>18925995
Take your meds.

[Anonymous No.18926092]

>>18913704
>his fundamentals are the go-to for modern psychology.

[Anonymous No.18926097]

>>18926050
my point is that if nobody knows whats correct and whats not in psychology they still have literally prisons based in their knowledge. so its not like philosophy or something, they have tangible impact in the world.

[Anonymous No.18926102]

>>18925995
Psych wards are for people that are really out of control and pose a danger to themselves or others (e.g., people undergoing a major psychotic break, those with severe eating disorders, etc). These institutions, at least what they are now, typically are meant to stabilize individuals until they are fit for release. Now the psychologists on staff, if they're any good at psychotherapy will facilitate growth by providing a safe framework for those in need to get better. Bad psychotherapists are more top down in their approach, and bad psychiatrists aren't exacting in their medication distribution.

[Anonymous No.18926135]

>>18926097
That's what the scientific method and interdisciplinary approaches to the field are for. Grounding psychology in neuroscience and biology, along with performing studies help chip away at humanity's ignorance of the mind, allowing for better, more humane treatment. We don't live in the age of lobotomies as a panacea to anything that is slightly off of the norm.

>so its not like philosophy or something, they have tangible impact in the world
Do you understand how influential the Greeks and the Enlightenment have had on the Western world? It's immense.

[Anonymous No.18926253]

>>18926102
>danger to themselves or others
this is ridiculous. who decide is a danger to themselves?, or better, why is bad being a danger to yourself?. psychology imply if you have suicide ideations you are sick, you cant be responsible of your thoughts, they know better, they have the legal right to know better than you. and they go with it because society is as coward as them.
psych wards are just an accomplice of the police to control uncontrollable people.
these institutions, depend in what country, they can have you indefinitely in them or , like in my country, with a legal maximum of six months, anyway they can and extend that time almost infinitely if they think you "need" it. they are in control. my point still stand, even if nobody think psychology are really right about anything and they are too scattered to have a concrete point, still we send them everything society cant accept, and they more or less do what they want with them. they have literal institutions to enforce their vision. even if society in general dont believe psychology know-it-all, still they let them do this.
my father was in a psych ward, and that definitely help to fuck her head. the mix of strong drugs, condescencion, and military routines its pretty sad and horrible to anyone. anyway, its not entirely the fault of psych wards. without them my father would be a strange problematic guy, with them he is now a zombified strange guy.

[Anonymous No.18926274]

>>18926135
>lobotomies as a panacea to anything that is slightly off of the norm
>pills as a panacea to anything that is slightly off of the norm
its not so different anon, believe me.

[Anonymous No.18926299]

>>18926274
I would agree, but at least we've made a little progress.

[Anonymous No.18926313]

>>18913051
Brett - History of Psychology

[Anonymous No.18926334]

>>18926253
Mate, are you the anon that I argued with about psychology a while back?

>>>/lit/thread/S14569466

[Anonymous No.18926338]

>>18926299
i suppose. always remember that people defend lobotomy at the time. and the arguments was that it really wasnt hurtful, and they put examples of people pretty fine and how they have good lives thanks to lobotomy.
there was debate. you only have the demonized version of lobotomy, so you think is a great progress. in the future all this pills-mania maybe would be demonized the same.
its like the people who say psych wards are not like "one flew over cuckoos nest". the dont have lobotomy but they are exactly the same, same interdynamics, same atmosphere. its a pretty awful world.

[Anonymous No.18926356]

>>18926334
yes, i think i am. its a topic that really make me mad. in my real life too.

[Anonymous No.18926882]

>>18926356
Interesting, well I won't retread anything from last time then. I found the discussion to be engaging and I hope I appeared as to be arguing in good faith. From what you've said I can understand and empathize with why you'd be mad when state/institutional power is wielded against individuals that may be a little troubled, yet are harmed more when interventions are deployed. I don't know how psych wards operate in other countries, but it seems to me that what you've experienced is a combination of an overbearing government, a neglectful and corrupt psychological establishment, and a very influential medical industry. Put them together and accountability, individual well being, and client centered incentive structures are non-existent. I find it all very troubling.

[Anonymous No.18927092]

>>18926882
maybe you think the story of my father was crucial to my development or my opinion on psychology. maybe it was, i dont think much about it. i dont remember what kind of opinions i would have or i had before. what im trying to say is that it wasn´t traumatizing for me, it was just something sad that happens. in fact, my father is a balloon of air since always and i dont have that much appreciation for him. but he is my father after all.
im from a first world country in europe so i dont know if all this is because an overbearing government or a corrupt psychological establishment. there are millions of stories like mine. or maybe i dont understand your point.
people go to psych wards psychotic or highly stressed, but they are themselves, when they get out something is lost, and the psych pills just keeps in time that lost. and dont misunderstand me, people like this with rushing almost psychotic moments and sometimes incrompehensible are unbereable, my father ( i know this is a little too personal and maybe boring) its a mess without pills, but still i recognizing him more the times he decide to quit them without saying anything to anyone, he is unbearable but i recognize the genuine him in that moments, in subtleties that i cant explain, you see a man full of insecurities and fearful and fierce. with the pills he is just a more tame version of him. i have one friend in which i feel the same. they are content with this meek version, and society, and psychologists are definitely happy and see a progress in it but i always have a sour taste in my mouth with this kind of intromission in peoples heads.
my point is that i think this problem is not because corrupt establishment or government, is something intrinsically wrong with psychiatry and psychology. and i 100% sure this things happened in wherever place you are from. anyway i know im sound too drastic, i dont have an alternative to psychology/psychiatry, i just pointing out the wrong i see.

[Anonymous No.18927199]

>>18917951
The funny part they don't like to acknowledge is that Jung was literally an OSS agent since the 30's, and wrote reports that were read by Eisenhower himself. He was known as Agent 488 and was a senior informant in Switzerland.

[Anonymous No.18927224]

>>18927199
>Jung was literally an OSS agent since the 30's
Really? That's quite interesting, didn't know that. I wonder what kinds of operations he performed and how that influenced his psychological work.

[Anonymous No.18927237]

My gf studies psychology, holy fuck, it's such a fucking joke degree
I heard some of her lectures once, it's like a fucking kindergarten
So glad I chose CS instead

[Anonymous No.18927286]

>>18927224

Apparently most of it is still classified, but considering how long ago it was, I'm thinking it may be declassified any time now.

From what is public, He psychologically profiled Hitler and Mussolini, He had patients who were sources of intel on the Nazi regime, He apparently advised on Allied Propaganda. His handler stated the work he did was valuable to the war effort, and would later go on to being the first director of the CIA.

It's the sign of a simpleton for one to make such accusations against Jung.

[Anonymous No.18927855]

>>18927237
>it's such a fucking joke degree
Depends on where you study. My program has has a lot of hands on opportunities. Modern academia in general is not the most sophisticated however.

[Anonymous No.18928190]

>>18926313
Shorter - History of Psychiatry

[Anonymous No.18928196]

>>18926313
>>18928190
He's actually pretty based...trust me.

https://youtu.be/iXhOb45Bvac

[Anonymous No.18928214]

The field of psychology as it is today is a Jewish fraud.

[Anonymous No.18928304]

Would one of the practicing anons recommend a book on cognitive behavioral therapy? I'm interested in the subject but don't know what to look for.

[Anonymous No.18928603]

>>18928214
How so?

[Anonymous No.18928753]

>>18926253
>>18927092

You must remember Anon that most people reach out to a therapist out of despair, hopelessness, a vague sense of discomfort or unrest (or such perceived on their family, partner, friend). It's not a therapist job to exert control and force social conventions upon the patient, but rather to attempt to reach a mutual understanding of the person's malaise and work towards improvement as reported on the person's subjective experience

[Anonymous No.18930443]

>>18924144
ignore the brainlets responding to you who don't know anything about phenomenology. to play devil's advocate, one could claim that the intentional view of consciousness involves a kind of "Cartesian theater" where all acts of consciousness are "screened" to the ego. the Freudian model on the contrary insists that there are acts of consciousness which bypass intentionality altogether. to some extent, cognitive research seems to validate both models in different ways. subsymbolic cognitive processes (like visual pattern recognition) are not intended in the classical sense, they reside underneath intentionality. however, as one ascends the tree of abstraction to high-level symbolic representation, then intentionality begins to enter the picture. Freud obviously did not operate by a connectionist, dynamical model of consciousness, his view is more or less that there is a deep psychic well in which symbolic representations take place without being intended by the ego.

[Anonymous No.18930452]

>>18913051

this book

[Anonymous No.18931936]

>>18928753
in psych wards they can legally force you to stay. its not about mutual understanding of the malaise there, they can literally force you to stay till you are "good" and can be no threat to anyone else (still you think this is not a social controlling thing at all). (also, in the view of psychiatrists they are helping you with all their good heart and maybe they even have good feelings for all that poor people "if only they really listen" would think a psychiatrist in his compassionate moments.)
my final point is that going to a psychologist is a rejection of your own introspection. and when you reject your own introspection you are at hands of another introspection. thats all. people like you think the dynamic of a psychology/patient is clean and harmless, i think they just dont think too much about it.