Faces in Smoke

C Elegans · Post by **C Elegans** » Fri Jun 17, 2005 4:38 pm

[QUOTE=Magrus] I didn't see anything but inkblots that kind of looked like beetles. He said I HAD to see something, and I asked him what he said. He said it didn't matter, and I said, well, if you think I have to see something other than that, this test doesn't work does it?

[/QUOTE]

LOL

although it is really sad that some people actually still use this. The APA (American Psychological Association, who edited the international standard diagnostic manual DSM-IV and who is the "regulating body" for psychology and psychiatry in the US) together with the scientific community are against use of the Rorschach test because it is not at all objective, it lacks validity (ie you don't know what you measure) and it is totally unscientific since it's entirely based on the interpretations of the person who give you the test. In short: it is useless.

The idea with Rorschach and other so called "projective tests" goes back to the days of Freud and the idea that your free associations around things reveals a lot about your "true self". The belief is that by describing what you read into these inkblots, you will reveal your personality and your possible pathology. The test-giver interprets your answers, and if you don't see anything else than inkblots, the test will not work, but it doesn't matter since it doesn't work anyway.

I have never met a professional who uses Rorschach for anything else than joking around with friends and colleagues. But sadly, you seem to constantly have encountered the absolute lowest levels of unprofessionalism in psychology and psychiatry.

Magrus · Post by **Magrus** » Fri Jun 17, 2005 4:44 pm

Good to know that it's just a local thing around me.

I was disgusted. He still insisted I keep trying to come up with something even after I insisted he give me his honest opinion, which happened to be the same as mine.

It's like he was trying to prove I was loopy and wouldn't take no for an answer or something.

Athena · Post by **Athena** » Fri Jun 17, 2005 4:47 pm

Whoever sees that crap has a pretty depressing imagination. Say what you will; smoke is smoke, it's the human brain that deciphers things.

Magrus · Post by **Magrus** » Fri Jun 17, 2005 4:50 pm

Oh...I could say something truly cruel and horrible with reference to a Bruce Willis movie about those pictures and seeing things...

Athena · Post by **Athena** » Fri Jun 17, 2005 6:02 pm

Or I could say something about purple haze.

Luis Antonio · Post by **Luis Antonio** » Sat Jun 18, 2005 5:57 am

[QUOTE=fable]Rather reminds me of the document forgeries committed during the early Renaissance by various RCC sources to offer "proof" that the Bishop of Rome had been intended to lead Christianity. I don't say this to denigrate Roman Catholicism or its worshippers, but because the forgeries were done by people out to prove some point of dogma at the expense of the "merely factual." If someone were to use photoshop to do this today, they would merely be clasping hands with their more primitive counterparts who had to rely upon ink and parchment.[/QUOTE]

The worst thing is to admit that the forgeries are still being made. Now no longer by RCC cardinals, but by evangelists that are spreading a "new definition of Jesus" here. Anyway, you gotta at least give the smoke guys credit for a good imagination regardless of monetary purpose

Chanak · Post by **Chanak** » Sun Jun 19, 2005 8:10 am

[QUOTE=C Elegans]LOL

although it is really sad that some people actually still use this. The APA (American Psychological Association, who edited the international standard diagnostic manual DSM-IV and who is the "regulating body" for psychology and psychiatry in the US) together with the scientific community are against use of the Rorschach test because it is not at all objective, it lacks validity (ie you don't know what you measure) and it is totally unscientific since it's entirely based on the interpretations of the person who give you the test. In short: it is useless.[/QUOTE]

I believe the last time I saw those inkblots whipped out in an evaluation was in 1982. The last time I saw an MMPI was in 1987. I'm not sure if there's a relation there, since I'm not privy to professional journals (and I haven't bothered to ask any of my professional collegues of the psychiatric/psychological stripe about it).

I was amused by the patterns I detected in the MMPI. It was...well, for lack of a better word, glaringly obvious. I suppose that my noticing this was a sure indicator of a pressing need to be heavily medicated. I also think the psychologist administering the test was put out by the questions I kept asking her. Inquisitive 17 year olds do not make good test subjects.

I distinctly recall noticing that plume of smoke photograph on the cover of National Enquirer while I was standing in the checkout line at a grocery store. Myself, I do believe I saw the face of my 9th grade algebra teacher in the plume.

fable · Post by **fable** » Sun Jun 19, 2005 8:51 am

Hell, if I want to find interesting images good for meditation, I'll go use a tarot deck. At least then, the pictures have artistic value.

ik911 · Post by **ik911** » Sun Jun 19, 2005 9:08 am

You do tarrot because you like the images, fable?

Anyway, the RCC has done a lot to glorify itself, like upholding the myth that Christians were thrown before the lions by the Romans, thus making the early Christians martyrs... However, there is no proof of that, anywhere in Roman scripts etc.. (I just heard that on Discovery. Felt like telling it.)

Can we call the victims of 9/11 martyrs, or does martyrdom need some kind of religion?

fable · Post by **fable** » Sun Jun 19, 2005 9:17 am

[QUOTE=ik911]You do tarrot because you like the images, fable?[/quote]

I use the tarot for three reasons. 1) Meditation. 2) Pathwork--what we might call shamanistic stuff, or hedge witchery. New words, old goods. 3) Divination. I don't do that for myself, but for friends. They tell me I'm accurate. Regardless, it's the least of the three uses for me.

And finally, I've got a few tarot decks simply for the artistic value. They really do provide attractive artwork, and at least a couple of the decks were made in very small numbers.

My point in my last post was ironic.

I should have put an emoticon on that line.

Anyway, the RCC has done a lot to glorify itself, like upholding the myth that Christians were thrown before the lions by the Romans, thus making the early Christians martyrs... However, there is no proof of that, anywhere in Roman scripts etc.. (I just heard that on Discovery. Felt like telling it.)

Really? My impression was that the evidence drawn from Suetonius and other early authors without religous bias noted Nero tossing at least some Christians to the lions. I can probably locate my copy of Suetonius to check, but it's going to take some time--still in storage.

And Gibbon, while writing for a Christian audience, was always factual in such reporting. He certainly let the early Christians have it for their violence and bigotry, but he also credits Nero with throwing some Christians to the lions.

Cuchulain82 · Post by **Cuchulain82** » Mon Jun 20, 2005 7:44 am

[QUOTE=fable]I use the tarot for three reasons. 1) Meditation. 2) Pathwork--what we might call shamanistic stuff, or hedge witchery. New words, old goods. 3) Divination. I don't do that for myself, but for friends. They tell me I'm accurate. Regardless, it's the least of the three uses for me.[/QUOTE]
You know, I have actually been pleasantly surprised in the past by how much insight a tarot reading can provide. I think the trick isn't in the fact that Tarot cards have a supernatural divinational nature. Rather, I think they just help people examine their situation from a different point of view than usual, adding a little more insight.

(I mean readings done by friends, in a relatively intimate setting- not like going to the fortune teller or the tarot tent at a Renaissance festival. That's entertainment, IMO)

fable · Post by **fable** » Mon Jun 20, 2005 8:01 am

[QUOTE=Cuchulain82]You know, I have actually been pleasantly surprised in the past by how much insight a tarot reading can provide. I think the trick isn't in the fact that Tarot cards have a supernatural divinational nature. Rather, I think they just help people examine their situation from a different point of view than usual, adding a little more insight.[/QUOTE]

True. You get nothing from it that you don't bring to it, but that's true about everything else in life, as well.

ik911 · Post by **ik911** » Mon Jun 20, 2005 12:45 pm

[QUOTE=fable]My point in my last post was ironic.

I should have put an emoticon on that line.[/QUOTE] I guess I should've, too.

My experience with Tarrot is, that for me, it kind of ruined the uncertainty and anticipation that one should have before and concerning one's exams...

[QUOTE=fable]Really? My impression was that the evidence drawn from Suetonius and other early authors without religous bias noted Nero tossing at least some Christians to the lions. I can probably locate my copy of Suetonius to check, but it's going to take some time--still in storage.

And Gibbon, while writing for a Christian audience, was always factual in such reporting. He certainly let the early Christians have it for their violence and bigotry, but he also credits Nero with throwing some Christians to the lions.[/QUOTE]
There have, without a doubt, been some Christians thrown before the lions. But it is unlikely that it was just because they were Christian...

I always thought Christians were thrown to the lions for not praising the Emperor. Apparently, according to the Discovery Channel (another factual source, I'd say), there is no real evidence of Christians being lobbed in the pit just because they were Christian. Hmmmm....

Dottie · Post by **Dottie** » Mon Jun 20, 2005 4:45 pm

The Discovery Channel who goes on Alien Hunting trips with rednecks, produce series like "The Secrets of the Templars" promoting various conspiracy theories, and also makes mystical programs about ghosts etc?

In my experience Discovery Channel is extremely sensationalistic crap.

C Elegans · Post by **C Elegans** » Mon Jun 20, 2005 4:56 pm

[QUOTE=ik911]Apparently, according to the Discovery Channel (another factual source, I'd say)[/QUOTE]

Ik, Ik, if you ever want to collect facts, never again turn on the Discovery channel, start reading scientific textbooks and journals instead.

Chanak · Post by **Chanak** » Mon Jun 20, 2005 4:58 pm

@Dottie: I agree with you on that score. Years ago, when more nature documentaries and such dominated the Discovery Channel's programming, I would tune in. Now, however, I have better things to do.

To the best of my recollection, it is recorded that Nero used christians as scapegoats for one of the various ill events that marked his turbulent (and short) reign as Emperor. I do believe that a record of this does exist in some of the Latin historical writings of the time, though brief mention is given to it. Most of the accounts of martyrdom during the period spanning 60 CE to 350 CE are to be found in writings attributed to early christians such as Polycarp, Justin, Tertullian, et al. I was going to mention Origen with those others, but as I recall, writings attributed to him are more scholarly in nature, whereas "Justin Martyr" would go into detail concerning christian martyrdom (also, a few apologetic works are ascribed to him).

C Elegans · Post by **C Elegans** » Mon Jun 20, 2005 5:11 pm

[QUOTE=Chanak]I believe the last time I saw those inkblots whipped out in an evaluation was in 1982. The last time I saw an MMPI was in 1987. I'm not sure if there's a relation there, since I'm not privy to professional journals (and I haven't bothered to ask any of my professional collegues of the psychiatric/psychological stripe about it).
[/QUOTE]

There is a connection, and it is that both the Rorschach Inkblots and the MMPI are based on classical Freudian psychodynamic ideology. Starting from the 1980's, the massive amount of lack of scientific evidence for the Freudian psychodynamics, began to take effect. By the early 1990's, the unscientific Freudian constructs had been cleaned out of scientific psychology and viewed in a historical perspective - the problem was that psychology as a science did not manage to unite the many psychologists and psychiatrists working with patients, especially those working with psychodynamically based psychotherapy. Thankfully they are a threatned species - their numbers are shrinking faster than growing, and almost all of them will retire and be replaced within the next 10 years in most parts of the world. The sad exceptions are Finland and some South American countries including Brazil and Argentina. For some reason unknown to me, the psychodynamic tradition is extremely strong in those cultures.

fable · Post by **fable** » Mon Jun 20, 2005 6:17 pm

[QUOTE=C Elegans]Thankfully they are a threatned species - their numbers are shrinking faster than growing, and almost all of them will retire and be replaced within the next 10 years in most parts of the world. The sad exceptions are Finland and some South American countries including Brazil and Argentina. For some reason unknown to me, the psychodynamic tradition is extremely strong in those cultures.[/QUOTE]

This interests me. Can anyone on these boards explain why Finland and a few South American nations are exceptions to the rule, in this case?

Luis Antonio · Post by **Luis Antonio** » Tue Jun 21, 2005 7:08 am

[QUOTE=fable]This interests me. Can anyone on these boards explain why Finland and a few South American nations are exceptions to the rule, in this case?[/QUOTE]

I dont know exactly about that but we have a cultural issue against people who go search psychiatrics treatment. So I guess it may have caused the profession to become inside a nutshell. Or, the disregard for new techniques from the profession has made that issue happen in the first place.

There's also the fact that until 1994, we were a country that still used "imports replacing" as economical shielding to our internal market, what cripples any kind of import, including books, machinery and base resources. So what we may have is a byproduct of that on psychology, read, someone couldnt have access to other tendencies of thinking because importing the newer books was just unthinkable (laugh, for some things used to cost 10x more than the national similar, and that included books).

There's also a cultural factor: We are still "out of homework" people. More schools could have helped us. We have to pay to keep children at school in many places, we dont have enough public universities, we started the cicle of recycling professionals in the last decade. So, the elder psychiatrists here may have a certain resistance too against that particular need to change. IMO that is also influenced by the church here.

Yes, if you ask me, that's also a rant, but that's very real, I have resources. Studying economical history really gives you some background on Brazil, specially cause we never had money for anything.

ik911 · Post by **ik911** » Tue Jun 21, 2005 11:50 am

[QUOTE=Dottie]The Discovery Channel who goes on Alien Hunting trips with rednecks, produce series like "The Secrets of the Templars" promoting various conspiracy theories, and also makes mystical programs about ghosts etc?

In my experience Discovery Channel is extremely sensationalistic crap.[/QUOTE]So, if I say a circle is round and a square has three sides, both statements are wrong? Sure, there is 'sensationalistic crap', but often there is 'crap' with research and, more importantly, facts underneath it.

[QUOTE=CE]Ik, Ik, if you ever want to collect facts, never again turn on the Discovery channel, start reading scientific textbooks and journals instead.[/QUOTE] I don't tune in to Discovery for info and facts, but for entertainment. Sometimes, by chance, I get a little info from it though. Purposely collecting facts scares me.