Its incredibly well known that Psychology has incredibly strict "re-learning" policies to keep your license. Speak of the APA here in America, you need to attend something like 50-100 hours of "continued education" every single year to keep your license. Most of which is always the exact same type of seminars on diversity and gender and the newest woke shit, unless you get extremely lucky and can get into a real meaty bio-psyche presentation.
This is something that was made clear to me as an undergrad, and factored heavily into my decision to not continue a career in the field despite years of college wasted on it. The amount of red tape, especially political red tape, required to practice in the field made it completely worthless for its singular task of "helping people."
So, its a bit hard to take his "woe is me" article as seriously, when he should have and almost certainly did know this was not only possible but had already attended plenty. Not only that, but given his other politics he probably happily supported them and help the industry push them onto others until his politics were effected.
The Psyche field has been owned by the government and their "Boards" for longer than he has been alive. But you only have to play by their rules if you are in it for the money, because they can't stop you from just talking to people normally. Only taking money for it.
In my fantasy world he outs psychology for the fraud that it is, spilling all of the embarrassing back channel coms that the "experts" share, and delegitimizes the concept of "mental illness" so that women and weak men have one less excuse for their inadequacy.
I still recall the (female) teacher confused when I said hitting your dog to make it stop barking is positive punishment ( in the framework of Conditioning ).
Punishment is to extinguish a behavior, whereas positive / negative refer to applying or withdrawing a stimulus. It isn't a moral judgement on that stimulus. Applying pain to stop barking is thus positive punishment.
Exposure therapy against phobias works well too ( most of the time the phobia is gone forever, except social phobia, which has to be managed forever ).
Most of the rest, like ''implicit bias'', is pseudoscience.
The basis for anti-depressants such as Sertraline is cherry-picking studies ; it dosen't actually work.
When I was in university, the teachers talking about Freud as if it was still the gold standart had not retired yet. It wasen't long ago.
Stuff like ''recovered memories from early childhood'' were compleate frauds. Therapists seeding the idea in their patients that their anxieties arond relationships and sex were due to ''trauma in early childhood'' and then doing ''sessions into the trauma'' guiding their patients into fabricating stories about their parents raping them as babies, stories the patients then sincerely believed.
Oh and Psychology will forever have this mark on the discipline : there never was such a thing as ''multiple personality disorders''. It was entirely wished-into existence by therapists suggesting the idea to eaasily influenced patients craving attention, inspired by trying to explain myths of ''channeling spirits'', people throwing violent tantrums wanting to externalize responsability into a fictional ''other person'' inside them, and bullshit like that.
When it made its way into pop-culture, attention-seekers all over the place suddenly had totally different personalities ''taking over''.
if you're an introvert, you're going to remain an introvert regardless of what you do
I don't even agree with that framing. People have different interests which includes different levels of sociability. That doesn't mean social skills can't be learned and practiced, like any other skill. The fact that a person would prefer to avoid the ambiguity and tension of social situations doesn't mean he can't be trained in how to properly handle them.
I reject is the idea that there are different "kinds" of people. Even if there are on a genetic level that the expressed behavioral distinction isnt clear enough to allow for meaningful categorization.
I’ll play along, find out exactly what you will do, now that you’ve been emboldened to do whatever it is that the darkest resentful demons lurking in your evil little low-level administrative hearts most truly desire, even to your own detriment. I’ll see how burdensome playing your pathetic game becomes, and I will publicize every single bit of it. And, if I get tired of it, which seems highly likely, I’ll hand over the bloody licence I am increasingly embarrassed in any case to possess and let you continue journeying oh-so-morally to the dismal, fearful, pessimistic, moralizing, petty, butter-won’t-melt in our mouths hellish straits that you envision as the paradise best fit for your fellow citizens, yourselves and your children.
When you spend decades building something (JBP spent years in school, decades practicing and teaching) you don't just let someone take it away from you without a fight.
JBP doesn't need to rebrand, his own brand is bigger and more successful than any psychologist in Canada- maybe more than all of them combined even.
The fact he has nothing to really lose is all the more reason to fight for it.
Canadian psychologist and renowned author Dr. Jordan Peterson lost his appeal against the College of Psychologists of Ontario, which had previously ordered him to undergo remedial social media training.
A panel of three judges with the Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed Peterson’s motion for leave to appeal as part of a previous decision by the Ontario Divisional Court on Tuesday.
No reasons for the decision were given, which is not abnormal in appeal cases.
"No reasons for the decision were given, which is not abnormal in appeal cases."
Hmm, almost like they'd have to come out and say it's because their entire argument is a sham against him, and they're doing it because it would ruin the money train.
Ok? This is the loser shitbag boomer who thinks trolls should be criminally charged or some shit. He's not for free speech, just speech he agrees with, aka he's just like his opponents.
Oh well. Since he wants to shut up anonymous online "trolls" why should anyone defend his right to speech?
Yeah, let him enjoy his reeducation.
Juden Peterstein gets exactly what he deserves.
He should covertly record it.
He's announced he plans to do so openly.
He's going to openly covertly record it? :P
Its incredibly well known that Psychology has incredibly strict "re-learning" policies to keep your license. Speak of the APA here in America, you need to attend something like 50-100 hours of "continued education" every single year to keep your license. Most of which is always the exact same type of seminars on diversity and gender and the newest woke shit, unless you get extremely lucky and can get into a real meaty bio-psyche presentation.
This is something that was made clear to me as an undergrad, and factored heavily into my decision to not continue a career in the field despite years of college wasted on it. The amount of red tape, especially political red tape, required to practice in the field made it completely worthless for its singular task of "helping people."
So, its a bit hard to take his "woe is me" article as seriously, when he should have and almost certainly did know this was not only possible but had already attended plenty. Not only that, but given his other politics he probably happily supported them and help the industry push them onto others until his politics were effected.
The Psyche field has been owned by the government and their "Boards" for longer than he has been alive. But you only have to play by their rules if you are in it for the money, because they can't stop you from just talking to people normally. Only taking money for it.
Beyond that, how does moving outside the jurisdiction of said bureaucrats make them "rue the day they tried to shut [him] up"?
Whether he moves or loses his license, the end result is he does not practice clinical psychology in Canada.
In my fantasy world he outs psychology for the fraud that it is, spilling all of the embarrassing back channel coms that the "experts" share, and delegitimizes the concept of "mental illness" so that women and weak men have one less excuse for their inadequacy.
"Snow Mexicans"
Geese.
The damn snow backs need to be deported.
Snow roaches if Anglos, Los Tabarnacos for the Quebecois fleeing south.
Psychology isn't any more legitimate than crystals for healing.
Change my mind.
Cognitive behavioral therapy has statistically-significant results.
The ''Women are Wonderful'' effect is well supported ( both men and women have a bias in favor of women and girls ).
Conditioning works. ( Positive reinforcement, negative reinforcement, positive punishment, negative punishment. )
I still recall the (female) teacher confused when I said hitting your dog to make it stop barking is positive punishment ( in the framework of Conditioning ).
Punishment is to extinguish a behavior, whereas positive / negative refer to applying or withdrawing a stimulus. It isn't a moral judgement on that stimulus. Applying pain to stop barking is thus positive punishment.
Exposure therapy against phobias works well too ( most of the time the phobia is gone forever, except social phobia, which has to be managed forever ).
Most of the rest, like ''implicit bias'', is pseudoscience.
The basis for anti-depressants such as Sertraline is cherry-picking studies ; it dosen't actually work.
When I was in university, the teachers talking about Freud as if it was still the gold standart had not retired yet. It wasen't long ago.
Stuff like ''recovered memories from early childhood'' were compleate frauds. Therapists seeding the idea in their patients that their anxieties arond relationships and sex were due to ''trauma in early childhood'' and then doing ''sessions into the trauma'' guiding their patients into fabricating stories about their parents raping them as babies, stories the patients then sincerely believed.
Oh and Psychology will forever have this mark on the discipline : there never was such a thing as ''multiple personality disorders''. It was entirely wished-into existence by therapists suggesting the idea to eaasily influenced patients craving attention, inspired by trying to explain myths of ''channeling spirits'', people throwing violent tantrums wanting to externalize responsability into a fictional ''other person'' inside them, and bullshit like that.
When it made its way into pop-culture, attention-seekers all over the place suddenly had totally different personalities ''taking over''.
It was always play-acting from attention-seekers.
Most of what you said that works boils down to "Your dad is right, you do what he says." and "STFU and GBTW".
The fake stuff has been with us under different names since the beginning of humanity.
Give the crystals more credit. They might actually help someone some day. Same cannot be said if psychology.
At the very least the crystals are less likely to cause harm (unless glued to a steering wheel).
I don't even agree with that framing. People have different interests which includes different levels of sociability. That doesn't mean social skills can't be learned and practiced, like any other skill. The fact that a person would prefer to avoid the ambiguity and tension of social situations doesn't mean he can't be trained in how to properly handle them.
Introverts can have strong social skills.
Although I suppose you might be using the modem usage of the term which essentially means socially awkward, in which case your comment makes sense.
I reject is the idea that there are different "kinds" of people. Even if there are on a genetic level that the expressed behavioral distinction isnt clear enough to allow for meaningful categorization.
From his Xeet "Mark my words, however: the war has barely started. There is nothing you can take from me that I'm unwilling to lose."
Quote from man capitulating to a re-education camp rather than lose his psychology license.
He's not going to submit to disciplinary action. He's going to let them pull it.
But he can talk a big game now that he has his millions and lives abroad.
Dawg, I don't take that as "capitulating"
Why does anyone care about the College of Psychologists? Just rebrand as a Life Coach. Psychology is a joke.
When you spend decades building something (JBP spent years in school, decades practicing and teaching) you don't just let someone take it away from you without a fight.
JBP doesn't need to rebrand, his own brand is bigger and more successful than any psychologist in Canada- maybe more than all of them combined even.
The fact he has nothing to really lose is all the more reason to fight for it.
News article: https://tnc.news/2024/01/17/jordan-peterson-loses-appeal-college-of-psychologists/
Without reasons, you're unable to understand the reasoning process behind the decision, thus making it a legally dubious decision.
"No reasons for the decision were given, which is not abnormal in appeal cases."
Hmm, almost like they'd have to come out and say it's because their entire argument is a sham against him, and they're doing it because it would ruin the money train.
You had your chance to do something about this, Juden Peterstein.
Instead, you told disaffected men to shut up and wash their penises.
Ok? This is the loser shitbag boomer who thinks trolls should be criminally charged or some shit. He's not for free speech, just speech he agrees with, aka he's just like his opponents.
Soooory Canada.
How do you say, Got a loicense for that mate, in Canadian?