is psychology heretical?
#31
(11-03-2010, 12:15 PM)Pilgrim Wrote:
(11-03-2010, 11:01 AM)icecream Wrote:
(11-03-2010, 10:47 AM)Pilgrim Wrote:
(11-03-2010, 10:35 AM)icecream Wrote: hmm, never heard that before. so without protestantism no psyhcoanalyis?

I'm not so sure about that, but I do think that if more people went to confession more regularly, they would be more mentally healthy.

what about the idea that psychoanalyis actually harms people? is it coincidence that it became popular at same time church was being eclipsed?

Well, could you be more explicit about how it might harm people?  I mean, it  might teach them that they're not responsible for their actions, which can lead to a whole host of problems.  Is that what you meant?

yes. maybe lead to moral relativism. instead of condemning someone of immoral actions like in old times, instead we try to understand why they did what they did. and that attitude will create m ore evil in society and create generations of navel gazers
Reply
#32
(11-02-2010, 03:22 PM)icecream Wrote:
(11-02-2010, 01:49 PM)miss_fluffy Wrote: Well, I took several classes in psychology, and I worked at an insurance company in the psych department reviewing case files.  I have an opinion about applied psychology, that it's largely unhelpful, but has some merit.  I don't claim to have any concrete evidence.

you got to wonder, how did mankind survive for so long without freud and company. if they're so important

How did it survive so long without surgeons and antibiotics?  The same way: not so well.
Reply
#33
(11-03-2010, 02:25 PM)QuisUtDeus Wrote:
(11-02-2010, 03:22 PM)icecream Wrote:
(11-02-2010, 01:49 PM)miss_fluffy Wrote: Well, I took several classes in psychology, and I worked at an insurance company in the psych department reviewing case files.  I have an opinion about applied psychology, that it's largely unhelpful, but has some merit.  I don't claim to have any concrete evidence.

you got to wonder, how did mankind survive for so long without freud and company. if they're so important

How did it survive so long without surgeons and antibiotics?  The same way: not so well.

but thats technology. psychology different. it proclaims new approach to dealing with perennial spiritual/mental human problems. question is, has it improved upon earlier ways of dealing with these problems? or not?

Reply
#34
I think psychiatry has improved upon dealing with things like schizophrenia and psychotic bipolarism.  I also think psychology has improved upon dealing with things like unresolved grief.  But things like narcissism, sociopathy, ADD, OCD, and addictions are more spiritual problems.
Reply
#35
The bulk of modern psychology with regard to homosexuality is heretical, because it treats homosexuality as an alternative lifestyle rather than treating it as a disorder.
"Not only are we all in the same boat, but we are all seasick.” --G.K. Chesterton
Reply
#36
(11-03-2010, 06:23 PM)Jacafamala Wrote: The bulk of modern psychology with regard to homosexuality is heretical, because it treats homosexuality as an alternative lifestyle rather than treating it as a disorder.

Heresy means it specifically contradicts doctrine.  Calling it a lifestyle rather than a disorder doesn't contradict doctrine, so that's not heretical.
Reply
#37
(11-03-2010, 02:33 PM)icecream Wrote:
(11-03-2010, 02:25 PM)QuisUtDeus Wrote: How did it survive so long without surgeons and antibiotics?  The same way: not so well.

but thats technology. psychology different. it proclaims new approach to dealing with perennial spiritual/mental human problems. question is, has it improved upon earlier ways of dealing with these problems? or not?

1) You were asking how we survived without something.  We can survive without pretty much anything that isn't food and water and God. 

2) Psychology is not different.  Modern psychology is an empirical science, and that's precisely why it fails.  Antibiotics - an empirical science - can't fix spiritual problems, and neither can psychology.

What psychology can do is mess with reason and the thought process to reduce symptoms, but not affect a cure.  For example, it can change someone's conscience so they no longer regret doing something bad - i.e., they make the person believe it is not bad.  However, their soul is still stained by sin, and the conscience is there, though corrupted, so it will cause more deeply rooted and hidden problems. 

My opinion is that most modern psychological "therapy" is pretty much a non-invasive lobotomy stripping one of things that are supposed to be there.  It's like removing pain receptors instead of healing the broken arm.

Psychology is not a problem, psychology overstepping its bounds and overstating its effectiveness is the problem.  The other problem is psychology is in its infancy, not well understood, and not well proven.  That's why people like Freud, Jung, and Skinner have such different approaches to the subject.

Jung is the most correct, btw  ;D
Reply
#38
thanks quis, and everybody for comments!  :)

Reply
#39
If you're interested in this subject in depth, I recommend Introduction to the Science of Mental Health by Fr. Chad Ripperger, FSSP.

Also, check out this website:

http://www.idpsy.com/
Reply
#40
(11-06-2010, 04:20 AM)QuisUtDeus Wrote: If you're interested in this subject in depth, I recommend Introduction to the Science of Mental Health by Fr. Chad Ripperger, FSSP.

Also, check out this website:

http://www.idpsy.com/

thanks!
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)