安裝 Steam
登入
|
語言
簡體中文
日本語（日文）
한국어（韓文）
ไทย（泰文）
Български（保加利亞文）
Čeština（捷克文）
Dansk（丹麥文）
Deutsch（德文）
English（英文）
Español - España（西班牙文 - 西班牙）
Español - Latinoamérica（西班牙文 - 拉丁美洲）
Ελληνικά（希臘文）
Français（法文）
Italiano（義大利文）
Bahasa Indonesia（印尼語）
Magyar（匈牙利文）
Nederlands（荷蘭文）
Norsk（挪威文）
Polski（波蘭文）
Português（葡萄牙文 - 葡萄牙）
Português - Brasil（葡萄牙文 - 巴西）
Română（羅馬尼亞文）
Русский（俄文）
Suomi（芬蘭文）
Svenska（瑞典文）
Türkçe（土耳其文）
tiếng Việt（越南文）
Українська（烏克蘭文）
回報翻譯問題
討論區規矩與守則
檢舉此篇文章
http://www.psychiatrictimes.com/comorbidity-psychiatry/shared-risk-factors-multiple-psychiatric-disorders
http://healthland.time.com/2013/06/28/brain-scans-could-become-ekgs-for-mental-disorders/
We at least have common ground there. All I'm asking of you is the same. You don't know everything, I don't think you're seeing the larger picture. I know it has valid and licensed doctors, I know some of them are good, but that's no excuse to not test psychologists. It no reason to say that because their methods are better now, they need to be trusted. That's just foolishness, and you need no research for that.
And I never claimed otherwise. We can always evaluate and question.
One guy while attending university broke into his ex-girlfriends apartment and destroyed everything when he was drinking one night. And he's now deciding who is sane or not. Another girl used to do every drug known to man and her boyfriend had to call the police numerous times because she would flip out. When the police arrived she would try to bite them. She's also deciding who is sane or not these days.
You might say these people are the best people to have in these positions because they understand it best, but the problem is they project.
I just searched him and the first guy is actually a Professor and Director in a department of Psychology and Neuroscience now. So i guess he's doing more teaching than anything. Honestly he wasn't a bad guy, and that was an isolated incident, so i kind of feel a little bad for mentioning him. That girl tho...
I know it well. I also know it's often wrong. It's not the holy grail of scientific truth, especially in psychology, which isn't much of a science.
Not that they should, but they do, and people don't normally go to those practitioners given a choice.
So what? Lots of professions are entrusted with bodies, minds, lives. The absolute worst, most regressive ones are always those that do not exist in a free market.
Nothing regulates people better than a free market. They can't just be allowed to regulate themselves, as they create a system exclusive to competition that secures their own jobs first. Nor can you trust a government made of people who know nothing of the profession to regulate anything. The government always gets co-opted, and then you get laws made to exclude competition. Then, people like you complain about how the whole system needs to be changed and apparently run by these saintly people you think exist.
It never ends well for them. Right now, we're sitting in the middle of what appears to be a mental health epidemic, while you and Ms. Bauer argue that nothing is wrong and that Rosenhan wasn't a good experiment. Is my perspective wrong? Or is yours?
You're making that up now. Neither of us said "nothing is wrong", nor did any of us say it wasn't a good experiment. In fact, if you actually looked back and read, both Fusion and I were discussing problems in the system right now. Which means there are flaws, and we see that. Rosenhan was a very much needed experiment, for obvious reasons. You're just changing your argument and creating things as you're going along at this point.
Actually, I kind of am. I forgot what you two said. This happens from time to time when I have to go do other things.
Lol I mean, at least you admitted it. Some people aren't so mature.
Why do you feel the need to put it more in his face, I mean, he doesn't need to give you reason even if there was which i didn't feel at all that he was. He's basically the first in this thread agreeing with the fact that Rosenhan was an important experiment which isn't that out dated and shouldn't be as long as we will remember its importance in the medical science spheres. And nor didn't I feel that the others was wrong, you were all speaking the same with the confusion of other people words and instead of remembering the mistake or confusion of everyones and closing this great discusion on that point then why not continuing it by expressing again the major flaws of what we can find in this medical science industry. Like the fact that once you're diagnosticed schizophrenic even if you are not then there is no way possible for that person to be discharge of that pathology as expressed in the Rosenhan experiment essay or any other flaws that the medical science bears, as there is for sure...!
I'm genuinely calling him mature. I feel like every single person here realizes that it was an important experiment, but that doesn't mean it's how modern practice works (therefore, outdated in that sense). As I've said, probably for the fourth time now, we can ALWAYS look back and remember the importance of older studies. That doesn't mean it's relevant to the way things work today. Did you even read the comments on your own thread? No one was truly fighting. This was a serious discussion. There were no personal attacks. So why are you acting as if someone here was definitely offended?
It's more of a kind of F*** Darwin...!