spinning plates

I'm arriving late. But wanted to say: I need to hear what you have to say about Freud. I'm from Argentina and is well known that here the psychology career is full of Freud's teachings. The smallest critic to his ideas is met with furious resistance. Every other country is leaving behind his concepts and practices. It could be a legitimate third part of Debunking Prophets. Can't wait for it.

Glad there is some significant physical improvement. I'm sure being able to create is good for you. Look forward to your deep dive into Freud -- in your own time.

I don't know if this ties in directly with Freud, but with many charlatans, they put more emphasis on vague emotional cues than objective reasoning. The three rhetorics come to mind: logos, pathos, and ethos, and I think on them on a scale of most objective to most subjective. Logos is most objective, since it relates to logic. Ethos is somewhere in between. And pathos, being based around emotional responses, is the most subjective. The way I see it, they all have their own values but it muddies the water when someone uses the subjective to prove the objective, when they rely on nothing but your emotions to prove their point. Religion's the first thing that comes to mind: speakers bearing their testimony always give moving stories with some kind of emotional hook to prove their deity exists. It might sweep me up for a moment, but once that's over with, and I look at it objectively, they didn't prove a thing. (That ties into your 'Telling Stories' video, brilliant piece of work, that one.) Strong emotions tend to overwrite rational thinking, and it makes it harder to discern objective truth. It's also when followers are instructed to assign some sort of 'revelation' to the experience, which they go on to bear at the pulpit. And to this day, we're told to search out deities when in this state. A majority of proselytizing material relies on emotional response to the point it becomes saccharine. The same stock 'motivational' music's heard in the background with 'sad' piano chords whenever one says, 'I don't believe in God'. If truth is dependent of emotional responses like that, it isn't truth. The same applies to pseudoscience and 'bogus therapy'. Using the subjective to prove the objective might as well be a logical fallacy, but I don't know, I'm not an expert. I look forward to hear what you have to say about Freud. Peace.

Glad to hear. 'Unconsciously seeking abuse' is an argument I have heard too frequently. The 'explanation by appealing to inaccessible mind' was a revelation, and the mirror analogy is perfect, thank you. It'll make finding an effective therapist, versus a charlatan, more attainable. Greatly anticipating your Freud analyses!

Looking forward!

Very exciting to hear. A good Freud debunking is well deserved, given the fallout of his ideas.

EquilibriumTelevision

I do find it rather hilarious that despite his "legendary" status as "the father of modern psychology" and what not, most of the reason Freud is so important to the field is because he was SO full of bullshit that loads of people began studying and deepening the field in order to prove that he was full of nonsense. It's like claiming that Hitler was the cause of the modern era of (western) world peace because the EU was formed in order to prevent future wars from breaking out in Europe because of how terrible WW2 got, not "technically" wrong but oh man "That's an insane sugar coating of things" is the understatement of the century. Just because someone was "The one to kickstart something", it doesn't mean they should be praised for it. While there are legendary people who were the first to realize how to change the world, there are also plenty who changed the world because they made everyone else realize things needed changing instead. Regardless, I'm glad to see you are recovering well (at least it appears so from the fan perspective), and making progress again. As always I am looking forward to whatever you put out, but definitely work at your own pace and don't push yourself too hard.