- Banhammered by Uncle Ed the Mad Moonie eh? Wear it as a badge of honour, comrade. --MtDPinko Scum 22:39, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
Psych talk page
Some of that makes sense. However, I think you lose too much if you disregard everything before the last 10-15 years. You can't just ignore Freud and Rogers because they didn't make testable predictions. Their work has had a lasting impact on psychology(both actual and the public perception) that cannot be disregarded. And, as much as it pains me, Freud wasn't always wrong. He made lasting contributions. I still disagree with you on behavioralism. Behavioral activation, sleep hygiene, etc. are all methods that are commonly used and well validated in studies. I would, however, like to see science played up more. The common conception of psychology is of Freudian/Rogerian therapy when there is so much more. I'd be happy to work with you on improving the article if we can. Cheers. Ayzmo (talk) 17:55, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks for that response. The difference between modern interpretations of behaviorism is that it does not reject that anything can be known about "the black box" that is the mind. The analysis just happens that way because of lack of an analytic assessment in experimental design. That is one of the trade-offs when first setting up the experiment - you can only measure what you design, and outcomes, no matter "why", tend to work best when they are, well, outcomes. I would probably argue that they border on psuedoscience, but that other research has been done to elucidate mechanisms, or you can work it out on your own from other things you know, tends to make it "outcome-focused" versus mechanistically reductionist. As you can tell, I tend to be of the latter view, but there are times when human input (the agglomerations of heuristics, biases, &c.) all together make both needed. But that's also why I don't work in outcome-driven Psych, except that time I worked at McLean Hospital in Boston and saw my AbPsych textbook come alive!
Something to consider.
Publicizing someone by (at least last) name as someone who has been caught doing X, especially if that someone is linked to a semi-prominent/controversial figure, is kind of a bitch move. Father Vivian O'Blivion (talk) 22:28, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
- Perhaps. I didn't say anything that wasn't already known to those who know him. I'm not sure how it would matter to those who don't. AyzmoCheers 16:21, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
WIGO World Entry
For the world8924 entry you added, You might need to fix the record and uncomment it.
Melania Trump speech
- I actually didn't see it on the WIGO for elections when I posted it, but I figured a first wife falls slightly outside that. I actually vacillated between world and blogs.AyzmoCheers 20:07, 19 July 2016 (UTC)