• ExtremeDullard@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    4 days ago

    Firstly he’s not a doctor. He’s a fraud.

    Secondly, there’s nothing dangerous about tagging along with a bunch of thugs rounding up scared unarmed undocumented immigrants.

    • catloaf@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      4 days ago

      He has a PhD in clinical psychology. He’s a doctor.

      Still a piece of shit, though.

      • ExtremeDullard@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        17
        ·
        edit-2
        4 days ago

        When was a last time a psychologist cured anybody?

        Doctors in psychology are like doctors in philosophy: they’re not doctors, they’re people with a diploma.

        • catloaf@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          4 days ago

          A PhD is a doctoral degree. They are doctors. If you mean they’re not an MD, say that.

        • FlowVoid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          4 days ago

          Doctors has always referred to university teachers, hence “doctrine”.

          But medical practitioners were once simply known as “physicians”, not “doctors”. Eventually they wanted the same respect as doctors. So they gave up their system of apprenticeship and founded schools of medicine within universities, thus becoming university teachers aka doctors.

          However it is incorrect to say that all doctors practice medicine. In fact, surgeons in the UK do not call themselves “doctor”. Why? Because those early schools of medicine did not teach surgery, so surgeons were not considered doctors.

          • ExtremeDullard@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            10
            ·
            4 days ago

            I’m aware doctors refer to people who are licensed to teach. And I’m aware of the difference between a MD and a doctor.

            What I’m saying is a doctor - who can teach - in a BS discipline is first and foremost a fraud. There shouldn’t be a PhD in psychology anymore that there is a PhD in alchemy or dowsing.

            • Glytch@lemmy.world
              cake
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              4 days ago

              There shouldn’t be a PhD in psychology anymore that there is a PhD in alchemy or dowsing.

              Just curious and not debating you. From what angle do you arrive at psychology being bullshit? Is it from personal experience? Is it a religious thing? How did you come to this conclusion?

              This isn’t meant as an attack, I’m genuinely curious.

              • ExtremeDullard@lemmy.sdf.org
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                8
                ·
                edit-2
                4 days ago

                Well psychology is a pseudo-science. It’s based entirely on suppositions that early psychologists - and mostly Freud - essentially pulled out of their asses. I have no trouble believing that it helps certain people to a degree, just like other pseudo medical stuff like acupuncture or homeopathy do, but mostly it’s a grift to transfer money from people who need help to charlatan who can’t provide it - and worse, keep those people in constant need of more help by encouraging them to wallow in whatever is wrong with them.

                Now, bear in mind that I’m talking about psychology here, not psychiatry: the latter is a real medical specialty based on evidence and research. It does incorporate elements of psychology, because like all placebos, if it helps, why not. But the helpful BS is only a small fraction of psychiatry, not the entirety of it.

                • Glytch@lemmy.world
                  cake
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  4 days ago

                  Okay, interesting (sincerely). I disagree about the pseudoscientific nature of psychology, but I appreciate you engaging with the question in a reasonable way.

            • FlowVoid@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              3 days ago

              Unlike alchemy and dowsing, psychology can make predictions that have been experimentally verified. To me, that means it is a science.

              For example, suppose 100 people were asked whether they prefer to win $50 guaranteed, or a 50% chance of winning $100 and a 50% chance of winning nothing. Let X be the percentage who prefer the first option.

              Now suppose they were asked whether they prefer to lose $50 guaranteed, or a 50% chance of losing $100 and a 50% chance of losing nothing. Let Y be the percentage who prefer the first option.

              Psychology predicts that X will generally be greater than Y, and this has been verified experimentally. No other branch of science can make such a prediction.