Originally posted by silent thunder
Psychology is ENTIRELY inner-focused, and this is its most fatal flaw.
Exactly how much do you know about psychology??
As for being flawed, all of science is flawed. No theory is complete or has been perfected thus far. There is abundant room for improvement, not just
Moreover, psychology employs a broad system of theoretical assumptions that are based in philosophy, physics and biology, which in turn have spawned
the sub-disciplines of psychology. To say that it is "entirely inner-focused" is wrong and shows to me that your general knowledge of this subject
All humans live within themselves and also live "outside" of themselves
I understand what you mean, but it is your mental functioning that controls what you do, despite the stimulus of outside factors.
Go to a psychologist or psychoanalyst, and they will talk endlessly about your childhood, your inner feelings, what you've allegedly
repressed, and so on.
Psychoanalysis is but one branch of psychology, which deals particularly with the theory of the 'unconscious', as well as inherited biological
instincts and drives that, theoretically, clash with cultural and societal expectations and demands to curb desire and act appropriately.
Many psychological theories involve analysis of experiences lived within your childhood because extensive study within the field has found that there
is a strong link between childhood experiences and future behaviour.
And childhood is where learning begins, no?
, on the other hand, is the psychological approach of seeking to explain behaviour only in terms of environmental 'stimuli' and
behavioural 'responses'. It does not deal with what is going on within the organism. Behaviourism assumes that behaviour is virtually wholly
determined by environmental conditions. Most of what people are is determined by nurture not nature.
But the psychological framework isn't set up to question the sickness of SOCIETY.
I believe this privelage is reserved for sociologists.
But then, one might be of the opinion that the 'sickness' of society has everything to do with the cognitive thought processes and subjective
experiences of individuals, in its primal stages.
And that's where psychology comes in.
If people are mentally ill, goes the theory, it must be because of something that happened in the past, or something inside their mind, or a
chemical imbalance, etc etc.
As I've mentioned, not all of psychology deals with mental illness or cognitive processes in this way. In the psychological sub-discipline of
behaviourism, all but observable, measurable behaviour is eliminated from study.
They will not be willing to look at the fact we live in a sick society and that that fact itself is making people sick.
Psychologists are willing to look at anything which might enable a better understanding of people and their place in the world.
An eclectic definition of psychology could be as follows:
Psychology is the systematic study of individuals, including their thoughts and mental processes, behaviours, psychophysiological
processes, and subjective experiences.
As a body of work, psychology represents all the combined insight, knowledge and wisdom that has accrued over at least three millennia of
self-reflection and social inquiry.
There needs to be more focus on how SOCIETY damages people, and how people can work to change the sicknesses in society, rather than only
focusing on navel-gazing and changing themselves.
Well, if I agreed with you I might be able to give you a more definitive answer.
But I believe that there are other issues that need to be taken into account when addressing the societal problems imposed upon people. For example,
while behaviorism does look at the assumption that all behaviour is determined wholly by environmental conditions, it does not rule out the fact that
there is some cognitive thought process involved. Behaviourism doesn't study this side of the coin, but just because it doesn't, doesn't mean it's
not there and that it has influence. So while people might react to the madness of the world in the same way, this doesn't mean that they haven't
thought about it just because we haven't observed it.
So, it is in my opinion that the problems that need to be addressed are subjective and related to how and what people are thinking, so that when they
are faced with a situation they know that they have power over choice and they can choose to react positively.
So that, when someone grows up as an abused and victimised child, they can ultimately
choose what to do with that experience. So they know that
they can choose to turn their life around at some point and decide to stop the vicious cycle that is abuse.
Societies 'problems' didn't just come from no where. They come from the act of responding positively or negatively to a situation.
To make an individual accept and be comfortable with a sick society is actually encouraging sickness, not cleaning it up.
Gee, tell us how you really feel why doncha!
I THINK, you should re-evaluate what your opinion of psychology.
As a concrete example, psychology all but ignores the thing that most people spend most of their time doing: Their job.
Why isn't there more focus on reforming the work environment to make it more psychologically healthy, rather than just whacking people out on
meds so they will be happy little worker drone zombies? (That a rhetorical question that answers itself...).
It's obvious that you already hold preconceived notions about the nature of psychology..
I think that in many cases, people's work lives make them more unhappy than their inner lives, their past lives, their sex lives, their
relationships with their parents growing up, etc.
It's all about perspective.