Any psychologist on this forum?

i like all i read from you so far. reflective quality, yet not necessarily supersmoothcosy.

i completely agree to your points on what one might call therapy"efficiency", though this word might have a quite materialistic flavour. i think one must reflect where classic (meaning more or less freudian) analysis comes from. and
what kind of distortion it was used for. from the limited
cases i heard of i would say that freud himself had mainly
patients with very physical manifestations of their problem.
and that at a time when sexuality for example was an
issue non-accessible but with a lot of time and passive
behavior of the analyst.

but today there are quite different ways and social acceptance
of certain "delicate" topics. so it is first easier to come to
the point (actually for both parts patient and analyst) and
secondly most "problems" are much less "physical". though,
writing this i doubt that i can use "physical" as a real proxy
for "severe", which i somehow imply ...
 
Quote from JA_LDP:

inCom,

You are correct, I did generalize in those statements based on what I believe and know, which I shouldn't have. Also, yes, I am 20 years old.

Obviously, I do not know 100% of anything. I apologize for making it seem that way.

I didn't tell my girlfriend that her studies aren't worth crap, her advisors at school basically did. They told her that unless she was planning on getting an advanced degree, in terms of jobs and money, she was wasting her time. So many people graduate in psychology, that an advanced degree is highly recommended to ensure a decent job, but obviously not necessary. But, I know that a lot of advisors are full of shit anyways. I'm on pace to graduate early and mine wants me to take extra summer classes to "diversify" and study abroad, and give more money to the school...but when I speak to professors and other advisors, they tell me that's nonsense and "diversifying" would have no effect on salary, acceptance into grad school, etc. But that's what hers told her.

I also know that lots of people graduate in finance. The difference is that an entry level finance job will get you anywhere from 30-50k (generally on average here in Michigan) while an entry level psych job will get you 20-30k (again, generally on average).

The few psych classes that I took, my professor graduated in electrical engineering. Then, like you talked about, he wanted a career, instead of just a job. He told us exactly what my gf's advisors said. It wasn't until he entered the doctorate program that he actually learned something. Up until then he said, "I felt like I was in high school trying to sneak a peak at the girls wearing short skirts. There was nothing better to do." The only thing that kept him in the program was the fact that he read a few books on his own and knew there was something more than what they were teaching. Remember, he was in it for the career, not the job. Some of the books he read in the doctoral program, he assigned us to read. Obviously, he analyzed them in greater detail.

These classes were extremely interesting. It was not psych 101. I took that in high school and got an 'A' on every test by doing nothing but using common sense. Anyways, his class was a social science course titled 'Power, Authority and Exchange.' According to him, it was a watered down version of what he studied to get his PhD. and eventually wrote his dissertation about because like he said, everything in psychology up until his advanced graduate studies, was pointless. His other course I took was titled "War and Revolution."

Back in May, my girlfriend and I swapped final exams. I tested her 400 level psych final exam and she tested my 300 level War and Revolution final exam (all based around psychology like why nations go to war, soldiers experiences and the effects, mentality, etc). I got an 86% on her exam while she got a 48% on mine. My exam didn’t mention a war or dates or any history. It was purely a psychology exam. Sorry, I’m really drifting off base here, but because of this, I do believe that I know more about psychology than the average Joe (the average joe does not have much common sense), so my generalizations aren't completely unwarranted. Even though I enjoyed his classes greatly, I cannot see the relation with what I've learned about psychology and trading. Maybe this is my fault.

I was sarcastic when I said, "the rest is useless," but from my experiences I gathered one idea: If one has any kind of people skills what so ever, he/she can be a successful psychologist and probably is to many people (friends/family) already. I agree with TicketWatcher, where he said the psych taught in academic courses (I assumed this to be psych 101, 102, etc) is not useful to trading. That's exactly what I said in my first post and that’s why I told the original poster to just go buy a few books. I’m not talking about some textbooks like psychology for dummies. I’m talking about 'The Republic of Plato', or 'Confession' by Tolstoy or 'Small is Beautiful' by Schumacher. Go buy some Erich Fromm or 'The Warriors' by J. Glenn Gray, just to name a few.

One more reason I think psych would not be useful to trading, is that both my mother and girlfriend have the WORST discipline of anyone I know despite their psychology background.

Yes, I have worked so hard at something that my fellow students (at least in my school) would have given anything for my "talent." I wasn't the best in the country, or the state. Hell, most people would say it's nothing at all, but in my school, I was the only kid who could run a sub 4:25 mile. Believe me, one just doesn’t go out and run a 4:22 mile. It takes years of training and workouts. But, I am not sure how that relates to the fact that I believe one needs an advanced degree to have a better chance at making a better living for themselves, especially with psychology.

You talked about experience so I will mention what little experience I do have. Last semester, I participated in a service learning program where we went to a local elementary school and talked with kids who had extreme tardiness, totally misbehaved etc. I was assigned a kid who had already been in several different foster homes. He was in 2nd grade. He's been molested, beaten, his mother was on drugs, no father, etc. I could not believe what he had experienced in his short life. After the 15-week semester, I had aided in him in coming to terms with much of his past. Although not as dramatic, the results were similar to what Robin Williams did to Matt Damon in Good Will Hunting. (great movie, by the way). He went from lying about everything, beating kids up, yelling at his teacher, to giving me a hug before I left everyday and breaking down one day because he “wanted to be wanted.” Despite his young age, he was able to grow and understand more about life and love than many of my college buddies and he is probably too young to even realize it.



So everything that you mentioned, I have experience with. My generalizations come from my experiences and from what professionals in that field of study have experienced.

But, I am just some punk college "boy", so take everything I say on these forums with a grain of salt.
More...
nice post, cheers to ya punk college boy ;-)
 
Quote from inCom:

I'd suggest you tell to that "someone" that if he doesn't like the way he ended up, to change again and be someone else. Not joking. Change can be very fast. For example he could take one of Richard Bandler's seminars and that "someone" will never be the same again, even if he doesn't officially do therapy.
More...
Bandler, yeah sure, i'd love to attend one of his seminars... but he is not the only fucked-up individual giving seminars around, why him in particular? u got more good advice like that doc??

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Bandler#Litigation.2C_Prosecution_and_Bankruptcy
"Litigation, Prosecution and Bankruptcy
In 1980 Bandler's company Not Ltd had reported earnings of more than US$800,000 and he and his then wife -- Leslie Cameron-Bandler -- were living an opulent lifestyle. By the end of 1980 Bandler's collaboration with Grinder -- where they lectured, trained and co-authored -- abruptly ended and his wife filed for divorce (after two years of marriage). Leslie Cameron-Bandler was later to report that Bandler was emotionally and physically abusive.[3] In 1983, Not Ltd declared bankruptcy.[4]

In 1986, Bandler was tried and acquitted of first degree murder. [5]

In July of 1996 Bandler filed suit against John Grinder and again in January 1997 against Grinder and numerous prominent members of the NLP community including, Carmen Bostic-St. Clair, Steve and Connirae Andreas. Bandler claimed trademark infringement, intellectual property ownership of NLP, conspiratorial tortious interference and breach of settlement agreement and permanent injunction by Grinder.[6] [7] [8]

In addition to claiming (retrospective) sole ownership of NLP, Bandler claimed "damages against each such defendant in an amount to be proven at trial, but in no event less than [US]$10,000,000.00". The list of defendants included 200 "Does", i.e. empty names to be specified later. [9]

On February 2000 the Superior Court found against Bandler stating that "Bandler has misrepresented to the public, through his licensing agreement and promotional materials, that he is the exclusive owner of all intellectual property rights associated with NLP, and maintains the exclusive authority to determine membership in and certification in the Society of NLP." [10]

Contemporaneous with Bandler's suits in the US Superior Court, Tony Clarkson (of Clarkson Knitting Limited) sought the revocation of Bandler's UK registered trademark "NLP" in the UK High Court. The UK High Court found in favor of Clarkson Knitting Limited and on 11 July 2000 Bandler was made bankrupt. [11]

By the end of 2000 some sort of rapprochement between Bandler and Grinder was achieved when the parties entered a release wherein they inter alia agreed that "they are the co-creators and co-founders of the technology of Neuro-linguistic Programming. Drs. Grinder and Bandler recognize the efforts and contributions of each other in the creation and initial development of NLP." In the same document, "Dr. John Grinder and Dr. Richard Bandler mutually agree to refrain from disparaging each other's efforts, in any fashion, concerning their respective involvement in the field of NeuroLinguistic Programming." ("Release" reproduced as Appendix A of Whispering in the Wind by Grinder and Bostic St Clair (2001))."
 
Quote from inCom:

"So just say "ok maybe I was wrong" and everything will be fine."
More...


now if that was not a little, just a very, very little, ...arrogant???
no offense intended (really not), but this invitation is hard to follow ... at least i think so ... but i sense where you are coming from ... so: easy ...
 
just an attempt. people here currently do not disagree a big deal. maybe we all (really including me) try to not escalate on the differences of our point but maybe strengthen more the common ground ... uhhh ... i hope i do not make a fool out of myself now ..
 
btw i realised with many friends that having a degree or not really makes a difference of not for people who have none. i am glad i am having one, so i do not have to think the others are superior and have to somehow defend against them. in fact it really enables me ( think i am honest to myself about that) to see through it and the lack of importance.

in my familiy all have a degree and especially my mother loves this kind of thing. my brother in law is a graphic artist and he has no degree and at the moment does not live from his art, but from some office job he does. now he really thinks, asides of being the only truly creative person around the place, that degrees per se have value. really sad to watch. he is always in defense. all his arguments have the flavor of defense.

give people credit for that. i hope i made myself clear ... no offense to whomever intended here ...
 
Quote from inCom:

The length of your last post shows that you're probably unsure of your arguments, and you're right. Think about it. You are trying to replace quality with quantity, just as you previously did trying to replace substance with boldness. But quantity alone is rarely a good substitute for quality, just as arrogance alone is not for substance and competence. I have no problem with arrogance per se, it can even be instructive and inspirational, WHEN there is substance behind it. You EARN the right to be arrogant.

If those professors really told your GF that psychology is just common sense/useless, well they are wrong. And they are not very good teachers anyway.

So it's their opinion or is it yours? Because you replied to another poster saying "that was my opinion and he couldn't accept it". Now you're saying it's theirs. Whose it is?

By the way, a high school questionnaire doesn't even compare to a university exam, at least in my country. There is no way a student could pass an university exam here by "common sense" alone. Also, many exams are still written AND oral.

"the average joe does not have much common sense"

This statement is clearly and plainly contradictory. "Common" sense means pretty much everyone has it. So how can't the average Joe have it?

However, I don't think you're a "punk" college boy. You're still a boy and I'm ok with that. If I'd think you were a punk I'd say that to you but you don't come across as such, so don't behave as one and be more precise in your statements. I see that you worked with problematic children and that's honorable. I suppose you put effort and dedication in it and got results. Would you feel ok if someone came to you and say "Anyway, what you're doing is useless"?

So just say "ok maybe I was wrong" and everything will be fine.

GS
More...

I think you need to reread my post. I never said that her professors told her psychology was worthless. I said her advisors told her she should be looking to get an advanced degree to ensure a decent job because there are so many people graduating in psychology.

It is my opinion that the majority of psychology is common sense. No matter what I base my beliefs on, whether that be what a professor says, what I score on a test or what I read. Is that not still my opinion?

I took 4 years of French in high school and 2 semesters in college, and from what I know about European education, one should not compare a European exam to an American exam. My understanding is that a European’s education is much more difficult and respectable. I know they do things a lot differently than here is the U.S. (I’m assuming your profile is correct and you are from Italy).

What exactly am I wrong about? You first said I was wrong when I said, “Psychology is the degree where kids say, "well...if all else fails, I'll just major in psychology." This may not be true in Italy, but it sure is in Michigan. Even my professors joke about it.

Also, you need to get over the fact that I said it was useless. I took that statement back because I was being sarcastic. I do not believe anything is this world is completely useless.

I know you didn’t call me a punk. I added that. That’s why I didn’t include that in the quotations.

With you being a European, and most European’s think Americans are idiots, I would expect you to understand the statement, “Most Americans do not have common sense.” …there I go generalizing again.
 
you used I sixteen times in your post.
some of your paragraphs included I in every sentence.
the market will prove your sense of self importance to be wrong very quickly.
 
central european point: psychology is regarded a not too difficult either. which does not per se say anything about the quality of it. it could just be: you spend less time learning facts but more understanding yourself and your environment. so: easier, yes. but maybe still more worthwhile.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top