This post continues to be worked on in July, three months after I created it. A lot happened in that time to explain my delay in finishing this book review and essay. More than those reasons, such as finally getting housing after over two years of homelessness, staring up my own tech company and more--the main reason this is taking me so long is because of how angry psychologists make me and how infuriating it is for me to live in a society which regards psychologists with respect instead of contempt. I have nothing but contempt for psychologists, even though some psychologists like Dr. Hagen and Dr. Baron-Cohen are well intended. I consider the USA culturally backwards and indeed incestuous (incest is common, parents raping their own children, where psychology is also popular). Future generations of Americans deserve a legitimate legal system. They deserve better than what we've always had with our whores of the court and the justice pimps (lawyers, shrinks, judges).
Dr. Margaret A. Hagen is arguably the most authentic psychiatrist in the USA and should be the example for other psychiatrists to compare to if they are to avoid execution for Treason to the government and Constitution of the United States of America.
Execution is the punishment for Treason. Dr. Hagen proves, without realizing it nor her own insanity, that she and all psychiatrists are also all necessarily criminally insane and guilty of Treason.
To be sure, this is no stretch of my imagination and I remind the reader that it is also conspiracy to commit Treason which they will find to additionally be the entire business of psychiatry and mental healthcare.
For intentions, however, as Dr. Hagen was indeed well intended to reveal her own thesis that she and her colleagues are whores--she is well intended.
As well intended as she is, the whores she describes in her book are America's judges as she accurately describes psychiatry pimping the Courts. To this point there can be no doubt if anyone reads the book.
Still, despite her conceit, contempt for logic and attempt to manipulate and confabulate a professional identity for herself and others the end result is effectively her testimony to committing Treason and a total lack of self control such she and her colleagues won't do anything else, can't.
Simply put, to totally defraud US Courts and for generations to establish a ruling-elite that is not elected nor called for in the Constitution, is Treason.
Dr. Hagen doesn't mention this, but her entire books is about clinical psychology having defrauded US courts for generations such they necessarily do not produce justice as criminal Frauds are deemed honorable experts. She never mentions Treason but everything else I said more or less is the thesis of her book.
Simply put, to totally defraud US Courts and for generations to establish a ruling-elite that is not elected nor called for in the Constitution, is Treason.
Dr. Hagen doesn't mention this, but her entire books is about clinical psychology having defrauded US courts for generations such they necessarily do not produce justice as criminal Frauds are deemed honorable experts. She never mentions Treason but everything else I said more or less is the thesis of her book.
Beginning her book, Dr. Hagen attempts to conflate a difference between clinical and experimental psychology. Throughout her book she claims clinical psychology is not science, is fraud when it claims to be science and then goes on to insist psychology as a whole is the pursuit of science exemplified more by experimental psychology with a caveat the non scientific clinical psychology occasionally produces useful data for experimental psychology--this, her paraphrased on page 12.
The problem here is one of omission. While she is comfortable denigrating clinical psychology as fraud, even with sarcasm and emotional embellishment to suggest she finds herself above the stupidity of her clinical colleagues she omits the completely non scientific nature of all experimental psychology, simply asserting it is scientific and/or in the pursuit of science.
The same argumentation used against the scientific nature of clinical psychology holds true for experimental psychology. Indeed, there can be no controls on human experimentation without those controls also and necessarily invalidating the outcome of the experiment.
Moreover, for human subjects to adhere to the rigorous controls of hard science all morality would have to be suspended. People would necessarily have to be objectified and so dehumanized such the results the experiment would always suggest people are more like animals than they are moral and apart from animals in this way.
Dr. Hagen chooses to begin her exposition on the fraud that is clinical psychology by making loose reference to a personal experience with her brother and how that, by vague connection, got her interested in exposing clinical psychology as fraud. She points to a criminal case against George Franklin where one Dr. Lenore Terr testified, her testimony one of insanity (counter-factual, delusional and nakedly biased verbiage) on the sanity of the Prosecution's star witness, Elaine Tipton the daughter of Mr. Franklin who was accused of murdering Elaine's childhood friend, possibly after raping her.
The judge in this trial was either high on narcotics, drunk, a complete and genetic imbecile with an IQ under 100, or otherwise persuaded because none of the lawyers objected to the non scientific and overtly bigoted deulusions of Dr. Terr.
To be sure, and this is better understood by those who have read my reviews on other books pertaining to the subject of this blog, there was never cause for Dr. Terr to become associated with this case.
Ms. Tipton had what she called a repressed memory after discussing it with Dr. Terr. The question of memory repression isn't a question to be examined, in and of itself as it was in the trial. The memory became testimony she witnessed her father murder her childhood friend of age nine.
Whether or not the memory was repressed beyond how she would have been terrorized by her father, afterwards, necessarily goes without saying. Every human being hearing such testimony, by virtue of basic empathy-intelligence, has to assume a number of different valid explanations for the memory not coming to light sooner.
Instead of this point being made against Dr. Terr, Dr. Hagen deconstructs the clinical method to reveal it as fraud while simultaneously hyping psychology as the pursuit of something more which it is not because it never will become neurology nor genetic science.
She writes of the case against Mr. Franklin, "The prosecution's case rested on certain psychopolitical [her invented word which mischaracterizes what is really fascist ontology where psychiatrists operate much like SS Gestapo--brackets mine] assumptions that have become popular in some segments of the mental health community. It is assumed that children who experience terrible trauma, like witnessing murder or experiencing sex abuse, often suffer, like some Vietnam vets, from post traumatic stress syndrome. It is also said that one of the most common features of this stress disorder is the loss of the memory of the precipitating traumatic event--what psychiatric call "repression" of the traumatic memories--because the mind seeks unconsciously to protect the person from having to reexperience the trauma in memory. Lastly, it is assumed that repressed memories can be recovered in the proper conditions, usually in the context of therapy, but perhaps through an accidental triggering as in Eileen's case."
Again, Dr. Hagen doesn't seem to care about the more obvious objections to the incompetence demonstrated on the parts of the authorities in this case. She doesn't ever point out any number of rational explanations why it might take an abused child, as Eileen also claimed to have been, several years to make public information about a murder she witnessed as a small child.
No such reasons beginning with how it could have easily terrified her for that long so she feared she too would be murdered by her father are given to expound the importance of the irrelevant musings of Dr. Terr.
Dr. Hagen is oblivious to these explanations and never even questions the absurdity of an expert witness to the testimony of another witness--who didn't witness the event--being considered by the Judge with taxpayer money to burn.
She also doesn't question the prosecution and defense attorney's ethics although she does point out the incompetence of the Judge and attorneys in the case. Apparently, the assumption of Dr. Hagen is everyone in the Court had the time and money to entertain the fraudulent expert testimony of Dr. Terr because they were simply incompetent, not themselves engaged in defrauding the taxpayers and all three components of legal due process--brazen betrayal of fiduciary duties to the Court and people.
Criminal conspiracy she doesn't consider, although that is more probable than the prosecution, defense and Judge all being of such low IQ to be defrauded by Dr. Terr. This is certainly the probability then, if the assumption is the agents of the Court were all competent in this case.
More important than these overlooked considerations, Dr. Hagen is bent on showcasing Dr. Terr as a prime example for why clinical psychology can be singled out so the entire school and it's high priest psychiatrists are not collectively burned at the state for Treason, brazen and intentional conspiracy to defraud the Courts.
Hagen writes, "Dr. Terr writes that when Elaine Tipton, the prosecutor, asked several jurors after the trial what led to their decision, "she told me that a number of them said my testimony had convinced them. I learned something from that: sometimes hypothetical are just as compelling as specifics" (Terr 1994 p. 58)"
For my part, when reading the books of psychologists and psychiatrists, I can no longer be amazed by how they consistently operate at a remedial level for education, forensics and critical thinking. I have't read more than a few but here too it is certainly true what comes as new information to Dr. Kerr is otherwise obvious to any rational adult.
Who doesn't know false reports in the news about atrocities done in Cuba lead to the US declaring War against Spain? Who doesn't know Orson Wells once terrified much of America when his telling of a fictional story was mistaken as real invasion of aliens from the planet Mars? What teenager doesn't know a liar who lies passionately is more believable or easily believed for the passion itself taken as sincerity, truth?
Teenagers who never had problems with untrue rumors about them at school, people who are unaware of what fraud is and how gullible people can be and people who avoid news of the world are all types of people who, like Dr. Terr, demonstrate a remedial social-intellect.
Its enough for Dr. Hagen to distance herself from clinical psychology which is perhaps her main purpose in the book and to establish herself and her place within the pantheon of anti-intellectuals who frame higher education in the United States.
She writes, "Psychology's takeover of our legal system represents not an advance into new but clearly charted areas of science but a terrifying retreat into a mysticism and romanticism, a massive suspension of disbelief propelled by powerful propaganda.....Thanks to the willingness of judges and juries to believe psychobabble with scientific foundations equal to horoscope charts, babble puffed about by psychological professionals with impressive credentials, what we've got now are thousands of self-styled soul doctors run amok in our courts, drunk with power, bedazzled by spectacular fees for the no-heavy-lifting job of shooting off their mouths about any psychological topic that sneaks a toe into a courtroom......The demand is great, the supply is huge, and the science behind it all is nonexistent. But the reality does not matter."
Let me unpack this, because this language is the language of an established anti-intellectual, medical and academic fraud herself describing fraud in our Courts after undermining her own credentials. Dr. Hagen, like all psychiatrists, is probably in the autism spectrum such the real meaning of what they say must always be unpacked. They only and always speak around an issue, never directly to it, because their subject is always themselves judging others. More on autism and probable diagnosis of professionals in mental health, in the next book I review.
The propaganda Dr. Hagen refers to she never specifically cites. She could mean the propaganda in the media promoting mental healthcare and psychiatric drugs with no established medical value. She could mean the jurisprudence of the Courts which have heard non scientific testimony as expert scientific testimony countless times before making it almost certain a new case would then also hear psychological testimony.
She might be referring to her own propaganda, the propaganda her book represents as it makes plain the fraud that is psychology while at the same time insisting some of it is not, or maybe one day more of it will be more scientific so should continue to be taken as something of value instead of fraud.
Asserting psychology has no scientific foundation and is comparable to astrology is a comparison Dr. Hagen makes more than once. Despite this comparison, she doesn't want to say it is also the astrology of the State, or Courts. That is obviously what she is in fact saying when she says psychology is effectively astrology as neither are scientific and both are involved in some form of cargo capitalism.
The astrologer uses those tools to observe the movements of the the cosmos and in using those tools gains an extra sensory perception to describe by psychic power what is going on in the life of another person.
The psychologist is twice the cargo capitalist the astrologer is for not only appropriating the tools of astronomy, astrology and any other subject then infer the same non-scientific and psychic awareness of what is going on in the life of another person.
She is quite clear and full of emotional contempt for her own profession in her writings, but her conclusions betray her contempt as she apparently lacks it for herself even when she writes the truth "does not matter."
She continues, "Thousands of psychological "experts" confidently--and expensively--inform judges and juries, patients, plaintiffs and defendants not only about how memory works--as in the Franklin trial--but how the mind itself works, how the personality is formed, what aspects of character and behavior can be changed and how to go about it, as well as what wrong was done, when and how it was done, who did it, how much responsibility a party bears, and whether and when said party can be rehabilitated."
Psychology isn't science, a point she makes several times, but it never occurs to her to mention its literally trespassing on the science of neurology. It is a settled fact of history and science, a long settled fact, that neurology is the medical science which specializes in the study of the brain and therefore mind.
Whereas neurology is the study of the brain and nervous system, psychology is mere philosophy absent all ethics.
A psychologist is a philosopher pretending to be a scientist only there is no love of wisdom as the therapist is a licensed professional and therefore a lover of money by practice. Its never wise to defraud someone except in the most extraordinary conditions such as to escape wrongful injury and yet the psychologist is almost always dealing with a client who is vulnerable and then savagely exploiting that vulnerability for money.
Dr. Hagen will almost make this point herself, falling short only to slight clinical psychologists as failed philosophers.
So it is never the concern of the Courts and never do any psychologists nor psychiatrists do more than purger themselves when giving testimony as if they were neurologists and had such expert scientific testimony to provide. Instead Dr. Hagen and her colleagues bypass all rational due process upon entering a courtroom after asking so many incessant questions of the prosecution, defense or both legal teams.
They don't have the capacity to answer their own questions with science, but their confidence in answering them anyway is unbridled. They seemingly control what should otherwise be rational legal minds, convinced they can supply the desired trial results more readily than the lawyers might.
To be sure, since 1947, the legal arguments which were usually made against psychiatric and psychological testimony in court steadily were forgotten by an increasingly incompetent judiciary and morally bankrupt law schools graduating more attorneys addicted to narcotics than not. How else to explain the complete abandonment of a rational jurisprudence for the pop psychology and jurisprudence after the 1960s?
Dr. Hagen doesn't care. She notes, "In criminal trials, we have competing teams of psychoexperts [frauds. passing for neurologists who also enjoy and promote a fascist ideology where psychologists enjoy occult knowledge and powers to detain and experiment upon innocent people--brackets mine] analyzing the accused, first to tell the judge whether the defendant is competent to assist in his or her own defense; then, if the defendant is found competent, the defense hires another raft of experts to testify that competent or no, the defendant is mentally disordered in some way and so should be found not guilty by reason of insanity, or, if not completely insane, his or her criminal responsibility should be considered less due to some diminished mental capacity or state of mind."
Because Dr. Hagen isn't interested in complete honesty, rather just enough to prove her patently erroneous thesis that experimental psychology is legitimate and clinical psychology illegitimate data to be considered she doesn't consider why the judge can't make his own determination of competence.
What are judges even for, in light of the complete rape of justice which they allowed and even encouraged, to allow so much non scientific opinion to pass for expert testimony? If a judge can't determine competence himself, for a criminal defendant or litigant in a civil matter then they can't determine whether or not the prosecution, defense, plaintiff or defendant is competent.
Again, if a judge can't determine the competence of one person, then they can't be said to judge competence of anyone and are therefore incompetent themselves. This outsourcing of responsibility, where judges no longer determine the competence of the individuals who come before their bench and instead outsource that to non scientific frauds, claiming psychology is science, is itself tantamount to Treason.
It is a complete and total betrayal of virtually every judge in the judiciary, to their sworn duty to the judiciary. They have effectively recused themselves from all proceedings where psychological testimony is given, such trials today proceed without a judge, rather a person standing in as a calculator to determine which side has the highest valued psychological opinion.
It is enough for Dr. Hagen to point out with nothing more than marketing to rival fascist propaganda (if not actual fascist propaganda in mass media) and a jurisprudence of morally bankrupt, incompetent judges, that psychologists effectively run the Courts today and there isn't anything anyone can do about it.
She makes no qualms with stating, even overstating, how psychology operates exactly as a religion although later on will make qualms when such is suggested for all of psychology. She always goes far enough to totally undermine her entire education but never far enough to realize it herself.
"Psychological explanations invoked to get people out of impossible situations are much like the deus ex machina solution to irresolvable lots in ancient plays. When all the characters are inextricably knotted up with no hope of resolution in sight, suddenly the god descends from the heavens and takes everything in hand. And, like deus ex machine and all other good dramatic devices, psychological resolution tales require considerable suspension of disbelief to operate effectively."
In other words, people agree to be irrational with psychologists. Being irrational is the unspoken agreement between the psychologist and patient-client. This is evidenced by the process of psychotherapy itself, a process and narrative like deus ex machina.
She surmises, "We are no longer willing to judge the conduct of others as good or bad, because we no longer believe that the individual is actually responsible for his or her own conduct."
Her summation, however, is like the rest of her thinking and indeed all psychiatric thinking completely flawed. It isn't some unconscious or Jungian zeitgeist operating like a Holy Spirit or collective mind which explains why our Courts no longer believe in good and evil, right and wrong, truth and fraud, etc.
This isn't some "happening" which speaks to human nature or even a moral resignation born from our justice system. It is the systematic breakdown of our justice system, education system, healthcare system, all the branches of the armed forces and every aspect of American society--corrupted by autism spectrum moral degenerates pushing their medical insurance fraud and fascist religion.
Dr. Hagen either doesn't see it this way after describing it that way, talking around the issue as it might be understood if explained in terms of cause and effect. Her non linear thinking is instead proffered.
She digresses to the case of O.J. Simpson, "When O. J. Simpson pled "no contest" some years back to the charge of beating his wife, he was sentenced to psychotherapy. Cellular psychotherapy. He did it by telephone.... In 1975, Officer Matthew Quintiliano, a policeman in Conneticut, was sentenced to therapy after he killed his first wife. He was cured by the wonders of modern psychotherapy in three months and was freed. He married again and subsequently killed his second wife......Why do we, the public, go along with psychotherapy as a sentence? Because it goes right along with the idea that no one is really responsible for his or her own actions. We are all victims of outside malevolent forces. Criminals are not bad; they are damaged. Since society caused the damage or allowed it to happen, society should repair it. Rehabilitation has long been a component of the criminal justice system, so rehabilitative psychotherapy fits well as a natural extension of that idea."
Except for psychotherapy is clinical psychology and therefore total fraud for expert scientific testimony!
Dr. Hagen presumes everyone in society is content with the status quo and accepts psychology as the courts do but this is factually not true. Many people in the public do not go along as she suggests, with psychotherapy as a sentence and punishment for a crime. Many do.
Her mischaracterization of society in the reality and framing of a narrative does have linear progression from page 1 to 338 albeit her thinking is not always linear.
Thus far her reader is situated to believe everyone and society itself has accepted psychology as the new state religion (this being a settled fact in her mind) and the courts have ben entirely corrupted by a jurisprudence grossly in favor of non scientific expert testimony.
From there she would persuade the reader to also believe there is no going back to a previous jurisprudence nor the courts forsaking jurisprudence for new precedent if such options would produce expert and scientific witnesses who would jail or imprison the psychologists.
By page 7 she is so resolved. Going on she writes, "Even for what is probably the most important question--"Will this guy kill or rape again?"--the forensic clinician is correct in his or her predictions no more than one third of the time."
She continues, after outlining her thought process thus far as being her "Constructing the Psychological Child." She writes, "the demonstrated incompetence of forensic clinicians at seeing into the souls even of their own patients has not stopped the legal system from granting them terrifying power, not only in criminal domains but also in any and all cases involving children as defendant, victim, witness, or subject of some adult dispute."
In the mind of Dr. Hagen we and society are psychological children and the psychologists have the cargo capitalist regalia, their degree and payment for services rendered, to be the only effective adults or overseers of personhood.
Her intention, however, to write this book is in all probability more noble than whatever interest she took in being so critical of at least clinical psychology, for whatever happened to her own brother--she implies he may have been accused of rape or seems to leave that for a suspicion for what she mentions in the very first pages.
Whatever her intention, she rightly points out the logical limits of clinical psychology and inadvertently supplies the testimony to damn the whole profession including experimental psychology to crime against humanity and indeed Treason, the active subversion of the rule of law and all reasonable due process in the courts.
"Are mental health professionals any more knowledgeable than you or I about whether a child has been abused in the home? About whether the child is better off removed from the home? About whether the child will grow up better under Mother's custody or under Father's? Of course not. How could they be? There are no special secret tests for any of the factors that child clinicians claims are so crucial to their so-called professional opinions," she writes.
To her question "how could they be" the answer is obvious and yet she does not provide it. They are because their degree, their entire education, is a fraud upon the court. Dr. Hagen well knows as she will reference Freud later on in her book, the courts were originally defrauded by psychology long ago.
Before neurology was even a science psychiatry passed for both. Neurology separated from the anti-science that is psychiatry like chemistry separated from the anti-science that is alchemy. It was a disagreement among scholars to be sure, people who did not want to be mistaken for the other type and indeed the neurologists who did not want to be identified as psychiatrists.
Dr. Hagen seems oblivious to the course of history even when it is broad and unobscured as neurology began as we understand it today in the 1920s with the discovery of the EEG or electroencephalagraph and MRI in the 1980s. This history she doesn't find relevant to the rape of American justice, as she calls it; but it clearly is and also obviously a continuation of the conflict between fascists and anti-fascists in America.
I will bring up all the good neurology can do with DNA sequencing, later as Dr. Hagen doesn't consider that either as an alternative to the establishment of experimental psychology and its rogue clinicians.
Again, despite a robust movement in the scientific community (neurologists) to address maladies of the mind and brain and many organizations and millions of people who are outspoken against psychology, Dr. Hagen is flippant to raise her straw man argument against the better half of professional psychologists.
"It is essential for the future health of American children and their families that all these professionals be forced to lay their cards on the table to that everyone, parents, prosecutors, and judges alike can see what an empty deck they are dealing from. The system is a farce and it perpetrates awful injustices."
She is flippant and not too inappropriate given the truth she is capable of dealing with, albeit seemingly above the fray for her imagined science in experimental psychology. The injustice is beyond awful and truly a crime against humanity so many have committed suicide, murdered, raped and been excused of rape and so become a serial rapist--all of these terrible facts about American society are the direct cause of psychology being taught in US universities as professional fraud (almost like an inside joke among the autism spectrum sub geniuses who qualify the majority of graduates with advanced degrees) instead of shunned for the phrenology it has always been and always will be--especially psychiatry.
"Psychological disabilities, not incidentally, can be diagnosed only by trained professionals whose word cannot be credibly disputed by anyone other than another trained professional. No mere layperson can hope to match or, God forbid, criticize the diagnostic skills of the clinical psychological professional."
Dr. Hagen goes on to better explain the immunity psychologists operate with in our courts much like that of a pimp (the psychologist) to a whore (the judge in any given case). She even uses flippant language to describe this audacious immunity psychologists enjoy from judges as none apparently are competent enough to rule even clinical psychological testimony as perjury, fraud for money and to defraud the court by mischaracterizing the opinion as expert and scientific.
No lawyers ever make this motion in their trials either, apparently, because their motions would be denied in any ruling by jurisprudence. At that point, both opposing councils and the judge become complicit in defrauding the court. This is the strict and irrefutable logic if we accept the circumstance as presented by Dr. Hagen.
Although my point is not her own, it is an extension of her point by extension of her analysis, presented data and what science and history she omits.
She suggests, "That the courts accept expertise on the experts' own valuation of it reflects desperation as much as acceptance. Our courts--we, the people--need help to understand past behavior, to control present actions, and to predict who's going to do what kinds of awful things in the future."
Still, given everything she has said to this point leaves her reader or easily could, with the question, if the Courts have failed because they've been defrauded what more can be said other than psychologists ought to be punished and many imprisoned until our Courts are reformed? What good would other reforms be if the Court is a prostitute for cult psychology and it's pimps?
"But relying on pseudo-experts who are simply not up to the job the courts demand of them will not further the cause of justice in this country. It will just make the whole system and whole society sicker....... we also must wake up to the fact that the present and growing dominance of psychology in the courtroom poses a grave danger to society than simple monetary corruption."
What Dr. Hagen doesn't say is what is obvious inference from what she says explicitly and that is our Courts have failed. Our judges are not honorable people at all, they are the complete opposite. They are wicked and incompetent to qualify their incompetence as presiding authority in a courtroom, buttressed by the medical insurance frauds all parties are required to pay to prove they are competent to American judges.
In so many words, this is what Dr. Hagen is saying.
Then she jumps into her distinction between experimental and clinical psychology saying, "The public and its legal system do not know that the psychology that holds such sway in their legislative chambers and courtrooms lacks any scientific foundation because most of the men and women who make up the scientific and academic discipline of psychology have kept their mouths shut about what's going on."
They've no doubt done that because of the slippery slope which leads to experimental psychology being nothing more than group-clinical study and also therefore fraud, not science. Dr. Hagen seems to believe society has already so thoroughly accepted psychology in addition to the Court's being pimped by the least able psychologists, she has no worry of undermining her own experimental psychology profession.
Like Dr. Simon Baron-Cohen, a psychiatrist from Cambridge University, in his book "Zero Degrees of Empathy: a new theory on human cruelty and kindness," Dr. Hagen apparently had no undergraduate education with a firm grounding in the classics.
Whereas he remains unaware his entire theory is merely the regurgitation of Frederich Nietzsche's concept of the Ubermench (being beyond the distinction of good and evil) and giving it psychiatric diagnosis as Asperger's Syndrome Dr. Hagen is unaware she too advances this philosophy for those in experimental psychology.
Morality, ethics, a scientific method, truth functional logic of the sort taught at universities or Aristotelian logic and I think also basic common sense is not to be found in their writings. They are happy to merely spew argumentation which does not check out, logically, and if they had a better education in Western philosophy they'd realize their mere philosophies have also been proven pedantic and unsound for about 200 years.
Dr. Hagen is about to tell us that experimental psychologists do not see people and clinicians do. She will draw this distinction clearly, when this claim is obviously not true with literally every example of psychological experiments conducted by universities and psychologists being an example of psychologists questioning, testing and interacting with people.
Dr. Hagen does make a distinction between patients and people involved in experimental psychological research. If a person involved in experimental research isn't a "patient" for that research, what else are they to be called?
She never tells us.
What people undergo in clinical psychology is exactly the same as type of experience to be had doing experimental psychology. They are asked questions, evaluated and more in instances of experimental psychology they are further tested. With clinical psychology the patient is usually also on a psychiatric drug and so being tested or monitored for how that experiment is going.
What is the distinction again, between clinical and experimental psychology? They are both people but only the people working with clinical psychologists are patients despite people more or less doing the same things with experimental psychologists as they do with clinical psychologists. Where is Dr. Hagen's sarcasm towards her own analysis?
Dr. Hagen explains, "Who are the scientists and who are the clinicians among the different varieties of psychologists? The scientists, the experimentalists, are researchers who study perception, language, learning, cognition, and memory, mainly. The clinical types are the practitioners who focus on personality as well as on so-called abnormal behavior. Another way of say this is that the experimentalists don't see patients; the clinicians do. (That's why they are called "clinicians"; they go to clinics to see patients.) Also the clinicians don't do experiments, the experimentalists do, sometimes in laboratories and sometimes in the real world. Of course, these divisions aren't clean. There are people who study personality, for example, who do real experiments; there are learning theorists who see patients; and so on. But in general, the two divisions hold well enough."
They do if you're an intellectually insincere and lazy person as all psychologists are. Plainly the divisions do not hold at all, not even withstanding even modest scrutiny. Plainly psychologists are intellectually insincere and lazy by education, such is their education as described and exemplified by Dr. Hagen.
If we are to agree psychology is about the evaluation of a person's behavior (regardless of whether or not we are also going to call that person a patient or give them a name tag) and omit all dada on the person's perceived perception, use of language, apparent level of education, cognition and capacity for logic and memory then what behavior could be observed which wasn't also some type of abnormality?
If a clinical psychologist isn't observing these things listed, as Dr. Hagen says this is what experimental psychologists not clinical psychologists investigate, in such a way the patient is at least getting a routine evaluation or evaluation on these basic things then their profile necessarily will be abnormal.
Dr. Hagen insists her distinction is more about brick and mortar buildings with signs on them reading "clinic," and if people go into one of these buildings they are going to see a clinical psychologist and if they aren't they have agreed to some type of psychological experiment which may last for only a short time or years.
OK, but this isn't the strong distinction she purports as what these psychologists do and what the people who see them experience being done to them is the same. There is only a novel, superficial difference when Dr. Hagen's distinction is understood--removed from her otherwise glib treatment of the subject.
"The split into clinician/practitioner versus scientist/experimentalist also holds across the various psychological subdivisions of academic clinical psychology, professional psychology, psychiatry, counseling, and psychiatric social work and nursing. In each subdivision, the majority of the practitioners are clinicians untrained and inexperienced in scientific research; the minority were actually trained in or actively engage in science," she elaborates.
Here Dr. Hagen has completely lost her grip on reality as a multitude of implicit assumptions have to be made by her readers given what she has already said, which she does not address and she ought to and must. Instead, she simply proceeds like a sleepwalker in her own dream with the moral to her narrative already realized and her book one long act of role playing.
She builds upon her fundamentally weak argument with increasing omission and irrational exuberance for her cause, articulating subdivisions in psychology which she has already revealed as fraud and pretends differences which are only superficial and irrelevant.
"For social workers and for psychiatrists and psychiatric nurses in medical educational settings, the situation is even worse than for conventionally trained Ph.D. psychologists. In these fields, there is not even the rhetorical expectation that the future practitioner will be broadly educated in psychological theory and research."
Not only are psychologists lacking an education in psychology, as Dr. Hagen explains, but so too is the general population and laypeople.
Let us go over some undisputed facts about psychology, every psychology student in High School is taught. Lets also call these undisputed facts facts everyone who claims to know what psychology is, are also familiar with or at least heard about before. Lets not also assume people who claim to know about psychology do not necessarily think critically about the facts they know. Lets agree people who know about psychology usually can recall these historical and academic facts about it.
1.) Psychology and psychiatry were the inventions of Dr. Sigmund Freud with much help from his protege Dr. Carl Jung. Freud was basically an incest pimp, taking mostly younger women who reported being raped by their fathers or upstanding members of the community to then ply them with cocaine and compel them to masturbate with his electrical sex toys. Jung had sex with his patients.
2.) After Freud & Jung, another pair of self styled academics presented themselves successfully in Western civilization, Ivan Pavlov and B. F. Skinner. The two were born years apart, unlike Freud & Jung who were generally considered moral degenerates by most people who knew of their work. Ivan Pavlov used electrical shock torture in combination with gratification and rewarding captive animals, inferring people too could have their behavior modified with such techniques. B. F. Skinner added the principal of "reinforcement" to such techniques to effectively domesticate people like lower primates, or chimpanzees in cages.
3.) Contemporary psychology extends the behavioral psychology as developed by Pavlov and Skinner, beyond where it was taken by Nazis and their experimental psychology during the Second World War, into paranormal psychology and psychedelic psychiatry such as with Dr. Timothy Leary. It is also an era in psychology with unfettered drug experimentation, drugs of all varieties, none with any known medical value.
For people who have memory of their formal education in psychology, to paraphrase what even students in high school are taught about it (or should be as I was), it is obvious the universities like the courts have been totally defrauded. Exactly as the courts, judges, are effectively pimped by psychologists the universities are too or for some reason abandon both moral and intellectual standards to allow for their psychology departments.
Dr. Hagen writes, "No education on earth today can be held to give an adequate account of how the mind works, how personality and character are formed, or what can be changed and how."
Her education, or writing, omits what neurology has learned about how the mind is the brain and an organ much like all others in the body--not an uncommon type of organ. Neurology, distinct and in natural opposition to psychology as a study, has even learned the brain-mind is holographic, has plasticity, can repair as tissue. The entirety of the brain too has been revealed in the Human Genome Project. DNA evidence continues to mount for so many different genetic anomalies in this human brain DNA.
"Psychology is a science in its infancy. With the best will in the world, it could not today meet the demands and expectations placed on it even by patients in need, much less by the legislative and judicial systems of the country. The entire psychological community knows all of this, at least the scientists do, and most of them ignore it," she now beyond even concern over how she shortly before totally broke with reality.
If psychology is still in it's infancy and everyone who takes a psychology class is taught it was first developed by Dr. Sigmund Freud in 1886 that is 135 year old infancy more appropriately called a still birth.
Psychology is a stillborn science. It was and always will be pseudoscience and cargo capitalism engaged in defrauding science. For more than 135 years, even as neurology provides legitimate healthcare and scientific diagnosis for people having serious problems with their brains-minds, Dr. Hagen demonstrates total and religious devotion to psychology. She and all her colleagues, grotesque versions of science painted in the remains of that aborted effort.
This is the second time too Dr. Hagen tells her reader than most "scientists" who are the elite experimental psychologists are actively engaged in a conspiracy not to publish their works on the fraud that is clinical psychology defrauding the courts. She doesn't describe amorality nor anti-intellectual motives and yet her reader can only assume both about the colleauges she reports.
She writes, "The psychology establishment has nevertheless permitted the tenets and practices of clinical psychology to be incorporated into our laws and our courtrooms, knowing full well that they are untested, untestable, profoundly unscientific, and not even generally held to be factually true. We have allowed the courts and the public to confuse the methodology and findings of scientific, experimental psychologists with the practice and interpretations of clinicians. We have allowed so-called clinical psychological experts we know to be utterly unequal to the task to presume to take over the roles of judges and jury as finders of fact in American courtrooms."
This is Treason.
The argument for what Dr. Hagen describes as the wholesale failure of the entire judicial branch of the US government, is this is mere fraud. The courts have been defrauded and that fraud, in the mind of Dr. Hagen, doesn't also constitute Treason and the conspiracy to commit Treason. The intent of the Treason to effectively undermine the Courts and rule over them, as psychology the industry-religion of the State is also not apparent to Dr. Hagen.
As psychology is a well established belief system and it is not scientific, it is necessarily religious. It is also clearly the favored belief system of our Courts. It is therefore, as a point of fact and irrefutable, expressly forbidden by the US Constitution as that document forbids a church of state.
This is Treason and the conspiracy of psychologists to commit Treason. It is conspiracy by fact of psychologists being organized professionals with the express purpose of defrauding the Courts and anyone else, for their profit and advancement in society. To hell with science, to hell with morality and ethics, to hell with the law is the legacy of psychology for more than 135 years.
Hagen addresses the seeming intent of her cult-colleagues when she goes on to write, "There has been another critical factor driving what must seem to the public like almost criminal negligence on the part of the profession of psychology: Many experimentalists would argue that because numerous troubled people seem to find in therapy the help they need, it is not just permissible but perhaps even desirable to ignore its complete lack of scientific foundation. This has been a grave error, with wide-ranging consequences for the field of psychology and the public alike."
It would be up to the Courts upon hearing a formal case against psychology itself and all it's practitioners, to determine how many murders, suicides, accidental deaths, kidnappings, rapes, acts of theft, acts of fraud and malice have been perpetuated because of the fraud that is psychology and so many psychologists. As a group of people, they are rarely held accountable and punished for being career frauds.
Dr. Hagen speaks of Dr. Terr losing a lawsuit for medical malpractice, her bogus psychoanalysis and expert testimony to the Court, but those odds are comparable to winning the lottery--about the same odds of getting caught for medical insurance fraud if you're a practicing psychologist.
Hagen surmises, "No. The effectiveness of a therapeutic approach in treating a disorder is logically unrelated to the validity of the therapist's theory of causation of the disorder." She surmises even though psychology is fraud, its fraud that works to almost always benefit the psychologist and therefore valid.
Beginning her second part, of 10 total in her book (not every part as worthy of exposition as the other), she quotes Peter Huber from his Galileo's Revenge, "The most insidious thing about bad science is that it can afflict even some of the more intelligent, methodical, and honest members of the scientific community. The reason is that it appeals to a broad element in human nature, not just to the vices but to some virtues as well."
Socrates said evil, or moral corruption, was ignorance of good or in the context of this essay on Dr. Hagen's book, the psychologist doesn't know how to do good because good is a relative term to a psychologist.
"The harder it is to verify independently the disease process in medicine, the more likely it is that medicine will fall into the same witch doctor trap as psychotherapy.....We have no direct, objective indicator of mental health. We can't measure the mind. And because mental functioning cannot be measured directly and objectively, psychotherapists are boxed into the corner of believing the patient, and the public falls into the trap of believing our witch doctors. The clinician has no way to verify independently what the patient says, and the public has no way to verify independently the clinicians' assertions about mental life," she writes.
There is no disease process in psychology there is the obvious fraud of psychologists when they describe a disease process and this has been the extent of their academic rigor and stubbornness for over 135 years. For nearly as long as the United States of America has been a country, psychologists have been actively defrauding courts if only the court of public opinion.
There are no direct, objective, indicators of mental health because mental health is fraud and if people were to talk about their mind as it extends from their brain there are many direct, objective indicators of neurological health.
Psychology has only ever been the treatment of the mind as if it were an astral body connected to the physical body. What other metaphor or again to note the proven fraud phrenology and so many schools of thought within psychology have been proven fraudulent in courts? Dr. Hagen insists as it was before so too it shall always be with nothing more than hope for improvement being the essential message of psychology as she understands it.
Dr. Hagen, well intended, then celebrates science as it excludes psychology as if her celebration of it saves experimental psychology from exclusion from the sciences, writing, "But what makes science so powerful is a second trait that it has.... Since exists independently of the scientist. While any individual scientist may claim to see something or to think that he or she is seeing a certain pattern, such a finding is not considered valid until anyone--skeptic, friend, or foe--can achieve the same results in an independent experiment of his or her own. The findings discovered through observation in one laboratory must be replicable in another laboratory. Data measured and gathered by another similar instrument. And thus the objectivity comes not from an individual practitioner but from a system that demands consistent and repeatable results."
As said earlier, experimental psychology dehumanizes or otherwise objectifies a person the more it would subject them to hard and rigorous controls for scientific experimentation. The Nazis and especially Joseph Mengele are notorious for conducting experiments such as freezing people and having them use language while they froze to death to determine the effects of cold upon the mind.
In America, the Milgram Experiment in the 1960s was conducted by psychologists who apparently didn't understand how authority can be immoral and even unlawful and many people will continue to obey it out of fear they will otherwise be punished by the authority.
These imbeciles who designed the Milgram Experiment were at a loss, intellectually, despite memory of the Holocaust and Nazi experimentation still in the living memory of the vast majority of the population. They conducted an experiment to discover what the vast majority of people already and intuitively know about evil and authority.
Hagen engages in a conceit she is probably aware of, but may not be, where she has revealed enough about the fraud that is psychology to suggest it is also fraud useful to the people running the courts and universities.
She suggests, in an underhanded way in light of the implicit assumptions to be made about her points on fraud in psychology, that experimental psychology is not science but rather a cult protecting the real scientists. She suggests psychologists are useful idiots or people who know how and when to play dumb, omit obvious and relevant information to promote ignorance of such a veil in society.
A veil between the courts and establishment professionals as represented by US universities, sometimes if not always has existed.
The financial barrier alone which forbids many from affording their own legal representation or obtaining an advanced degree is enough of a veil; but psychology more accurately describes it. Dr. Hagen seems to elude to it, here. People are either deemed worthy or unworthy by psychologists and its their prerogative to judge.
The courts have degreed those with the appropriate degree in psychology, rule as expert and scientific witnesses even though they factually are not.
Indeed, US courts and universities are invested in this more social caste of psychologists to function as gate keepers to privilege, even to legal due process and Constitutional rights. Insomuch academia in the USA is so conspired, they too are implicated in this obvious Treason against the Constitution and even more importantly intellectually dishonest and inbred-degenerate behavior.
"What distinguishes a scientist from any other seeker after truth is exactly this. The scientist can be and often is wrong. A real scientific theory tells you, in effect, If the theory is right, then this particular thing ought to happen under these certain conditions. If it doesn't happen, then the theory is wrong. If a theory cannot be proven wrong in its predictions, then it is not science.....In clinical psychology, however, the imperviousness to factual challenge is not just the don't-bother-me-with-facts mulishness of a few stubborn graybeards, it is a legacy handed down from generation to generation."
This legacy is one of frauds and gatekeepers to social privilege often referred to as white privilege or access to and collaboration with the upper class. Dr. Hagen refers to it more vaguely but with sufficient suggestion, clinical psychology is a cult.
More accurate, however, is psychology has always been a cult and openly so since Freud. It will continue to undermine society and government until neurology and actual medical science finally criminalizes it and holds it accountable for all the pain and suffering it has caused. For most of history the vast majority of people have regarded it as pseudoscience or outright malevolent play-psychic garbage.
Still, because psychologists have built their industry on the ruthless exploitation of people in crisis especially children and victims of sexual assault, the strong in society have never stood against psychologists and instead collaborate with them to the detriment of society. In a society dominated by psychologists, even the strong are weak of mind.
"In clinical psychology, however, the imperviousness to factual challenge is not just the don't-bother-me-with-facts mulishness of a few stubborn graybeards, it is a legacy handed down from generation to generation," Hagen writes.
Indeed, like the shame of incest because that is what psychologists have made the most money on since Freud, generation after generation of more chimpanzee than human being for sexual morality--so many Europeans raping children only to send them to psychologists so they can keep on doing it. Nobody goes to jail except perhaps the victim after being driven insane, in a world where psychologists operate.
This is what judges in Western civilization have been into more than justice for their continued acceptance of psychiatric and psychological testimony as expert testimony when the scientific fact is 100% certain psychology and even psychiatry are not nor will ever be sciences.
Theirs is a legacy of incest, mental retardation, racism, slavery, organized crime passing for law enforcement and the empire of fuck and garbage the USA represents today. They are the so called intelligentsia in the United States and to a lesser extent now, still much of Europe.
All because autism spectrum dunces are graduated en mass by the brothels now passing for universities in the industrialized West. All because psychology became the church of the state. The compounded mistakes of so many judges and courts has rendered the judiciary in the USA a total fraud along with most of the country's institutions. All institutions heed the opinions of accredited mentally retarded people who believe they are psychic, psychologists.
This is hardly an argument for freedom and liberty as it compares to communist China. Psychology is the occult practice by which Hitler's SS Gestapo operated. Psychology will always constitute a non constitutional authority or illegitimate-cult authority want to subordinate a legitimate rule of law.
Its no coincidence psychology came to exist just before the Second World War, flourished during it and now continues to be the totally dominant school for understanding everything about human beings, without any scientific evidence. It is a wicked, evil, social distortion that is the work of psychologists.
America, for having it's justice system raped by psychologists as Dr. Hagen suggests in her book, appears to everyone and the world as a society of mostly rapists, most people invested in their own rape and the rape of others like they are invested in psychology such none would have justice. This, the new equality after the Baby Boomers.
Hagen writes, "In his 1993 book Galileo's Revenge: Junk Science in the Courtroom, Peter Huber defines the term so: Junk science is the mirror image of real science, with much of the same form but none of the same substance.... It is a hodgepodge of biased data, spurious inference, and logical legerdemain, patched together by researchers whose enthusiasm for discovery and diagnosis far outstrips their skill. It is a catalog of every conceivable kind of error: data dredging, wishful thinking, truculent dogmatism, and, now and again, outright fraud (pp.2-3)."
Junk science is more colloquially understood as cargo capitalism, arguably, among academics. This idea that doing a bunch of stuff, being a person who appears both professional and busy with their profession even when the person has no understanding whatsoever of how their equipment works or even what their equipment might be legitimately used for is enough to fool some people.
Hagen continues, "What "scientific instruments" did Freud use to gather the data to build his theory of the healthy and unhealthy development of personality, with its psychosexual stages, Oedipus complex, castration anxiety, penis envy, Id, Ego, Superego, defense mechanisms, and the unconscious mind? Well, he analyzed his patients' dreams, he listened to their little slips of the tongue, and he asked them to freely associate to various words he gave them. That's it. The patient talked. Freud listened. A theory was born. And it grew, and grew and it grew.... The "instrument" for gathering data and building theory used by Freud and his cohorts and followers and by nearly all clinicians today was and is "clinical intuition."
Clinical intuition isn't a skill nor talent. It is a hunch, irrational, informed but not scientific opinion. It is like much of the language used by psychologists, meaningless drivel people are expected to take seriously or accept to suffer the tantrum of the psychologist.
Dr. Hagens suggests this would only be the case for Freudians, "Freud's collected works, occupying some two linear feet of library shelf space, provide hundreds of examples of his clinical intuition at work building the pseudo-science of clinical psychology. They provide no examples of the objective testing of falsifiable hypotheses under carefully controlled conditions of observation producing replicable, generalizable results. None. In Freud's work, there is not one scintilla of what any respectable scientist would call science."
There is that much evidence of fraud, extortion, racketeering, sexual abuse and torture, etc. Freud never served any time in jail. Apparently enough judges in Europe at the time were also raping their daughters and preferably on Freud's cocaine.
Today, genetic science and neurology suggest both Freud and his friends in the judiciary are in the autism spectrum if not also addicted to narcotics. This fact I will make plain in my book, Rape Culture.
Hagen speaks of junk science today being best understood as clinical psychology, "Have things changed in clinical psychology? Are the instruments modern clinicians use any better than those of Freud?...No, they are not, and nothing has really changed.....Like Freud before them, in place of data gathered or theory built by any instrument even remotely scientific, today's clinical practitioners offer the courts and legislatures--not to mention their patients and students--their clinical intuitions about how the mind is formed and how it functions, about psychology injury or guilt, about repression and recovery of memory, about trauma and the unconscious, dangerousness, parental fitness, child welfare, competency, rehabilitation, or any psychological thing under the sun."
To continue my analysis of Dr. Hagen, at this point, I have to set aside all further comments on how what she says of clinical psychology is also true of all psychology and therefore the courts and so too then the universities and every government institution in the United States of America.
Here, on her point of "junk science" and calling clinical psychology that people will either agree or not. To my logic for why what she says of clinical psychology is also true of experimental psychology, the courts, etc. people will either agree or not.
To my thesis of Treason and conspiracy to commit Treason being the greatest crime psychologists are guilty of and all necessarily so for simply being in practice, that too is either proven or not at this point.
If it is true that fraud has defrauded the courts it has therefore defrauded the government and so as it is alleged psychology is the intent to commit this fraud so too it is also Treason.
That all aside, further analysis of Dr. Hagen's writing is on the real fraud that is clinical psychology.
She is correct, I will also say at this point in that it is and what more I will add will be further evidence supporting her data and thesis with continued criticism of what she calls experimental psychology being mere group-clinical psychology.
The last point on Treason and how psychology should be formally criminalized, like pimping and human trafficking are illegal, is Dr. Hagen's work is transparent despite her conceit for experimental psychology, falsely calling it science. She and other psychiatrists and psychologists have done enough to expose the fraud and indeed medical insurance fraud that is psychology when society realizes it has also been undermined by these Traitors, she and those like her ought be remembered as traitors to the Traitors.
The logic for my continued critique against experimental and clinical psychology is also a critique of Dr. Hagen's logic.
A proven fraud does not become something more by adding more proven frauds, such as with the multiplication of negative numbers -1 x -1 = 1 it is literally addition, -1 + -1 = -2. Hagen, for reasons she never specifies and I realize as her non linear thinking, perceives experimental psychology by multiplication-rationale. Fraud being a negative connotation too, so the negative numbers in logic.
In experimental psychology, the group-study qualifies her rationale.
Moving on, Dr. Hagen continues to explain how psychotherapy is fantasy role playing, nothing more albeit with want for realism, "The psychoexpert presenting a creative interpretation of a claimant's story is authenticating that story, corroborating it, vouching for the veracity of the story without a scintilla of data gathered from anywhere but the claimant. What's the point? To tell the court the claimant is a truthful person? How would any psychological expert know that? Clinicians are not lie detectors. They are no better than any judge or jury at distinguishing truth from falsehood. Besides lie detection is not supposed to be the function of an expert psychological witness in court. The psychoexpert adds nothing to the claimant's testimony except a fraudulent veneer of authenticity that is utterly misleading and entirely out of place in any courtroom."
Even lie detectors are not taken as evidence in most courts for themselves being non conclusive--the conclusion doesn't follow from the data presented. Its the same with psychologists insomuch they have to lack empathy for humanity at large, the society want for a justice system without fraudulent experts so are more or less robot-pimps turning lawyers and judges into whore-like play alongs.
"This refusal to seek corroboration of the patient's claims is clinical junk science in its most common form.... You cannot validate a clinician's intuitions with more intuitions, and you cannot validate what a patient says with what a patient says. However consistent or plausible the story is does not touch on the matter of truth, on accuracy and reliability."
Obviously, or so it should be obvious to someone with so much education as a lawyer. Still our lawyers in the USA are lost for words without their psychobabble and legalize. US Courts are more Klu Klux Klan rallies for Evangelical Christians talking in tongues, psychologists for Grand Wizards and judges their subordinate Grand Dragons.
"Intuition is the most frequently and widely used tool in clinical psychology, but it is not the only weapon in the forensic clinician's armamentarium...... The most wide used and the most generally respected of the so-called objective tests is the Minnesota Multiphasic Hathaway and John C. McKinley. The test asks 550 true-or-false questions about people's attitudes about religion and sexual practices, their perceptions of health, and their political ideas, as well as information on family, education and occupation," Hagen writes.
"Answers on the MMPI are said to reveal hypochondriasis, depression, hysteria, masculinity-feminity, paranoia, hypomania (excitability), psychopathic deviancy, psychasthenia (irrational fears and compulsive actions), schizophrenia, and social introversion (withdrawal). There is also a scale that is supposed to detect truly savvy test takers who are just faking it," she writes of psychology's most respected scientific tool.
Of course its not a scientific tool at all, its a long questionnaire like are commonly found in women's magazines like Cosmopolitan or Vanity Fair. Its a series of questions which are easily made interesting to talk about once the time is invested to answer the long series of questions.
Dr. Hagen turns to the second most respectable so-called scientific tool of psychology, "There are ten Rorscharch cards, five black-and-white and five colored. The client-patient-plaintiff-defendant is asked to go through the cards and discuss freely what he or she "sees" while the tester asks questions. The Rorscharch, "unstructured" as it is, lacks any content validity at all..... What's wrong with using these putatively "scientific instruments" to measure enduring personality traits like paranoia or serious mental illness like schizophrenia?.... Basically, they do not do the job. They cannot do the job. As instruments to measure psyche, they are useless."
It remains to be studied how much money psychologists have earned while using Rorscharch cards, talking about them or teaching other people how to use them.
Hagen continues, "Even if we were to grant against all the evidence, just for the sake of discussion, that all or most of the persons categorized with a certain diagnostic label do actually show the same symptoms, does it follow logically that they also share views on religion, sexual practices, politics, and health as asked on the so-called objective MMPI? No. Of course not. And what sort of thinking or logic dictates that schizophrenics or depressives or obsessives or whoever all feel the same way about the color red or the use of detail or "negative" space or whatever as required by Rorschach scoring systems?"
Dr. Hagen uses the expression "of course not" several times when referring to the irrational propositions put forth by clinical psychology and does it so often her reader has to wonder why so many stupid propositions are not ruled to be stupid and irrelevant by judges?
Although this is begging the question it must be a common question to ask when considering whether judges are so intellectually dishonest and dishonorable because they and their colleagues have already decided to be rapists who then libel their victims schizophrenic in the long autistic tradition of Sigmund Freud? Our judges are moral degenerates and criminals before the fact, before they are sworn as judges, to put it another way.
Dr. Hagen is quoted at length:
"In fact, the authors of the MMPI gave up the original attempt to use the test to diagnose various kinds of mental disorders almost before the ink was dry on the first edition.
Anastasi explains, "[W]e cannot assume that a high score on the Schizophrenia scale indicates the presence of schizophrenia. Other psychotic groups show high elevation on this scale and schizophrenics often score high on other scales. Moreover, such a score may occur in a normal person" (1970, pp. 445-46; italics added).
In a nutshell, that means that the most widely used instrument for testing personality in America has a theoretical foundation that is pathetically weak.
Was the MMPI, then, simply abandoned as hopelessly not up to the job? Oh, no. Of course not. Remember, clinicians are the people who think sinus problems are caused by sexual practices. The current routine is to take persons with similar profiles across the nine scales and then try to find something else in their lives that correlates with their MMPI profiles. By the end of 1995, there were over nine thousand such published studies. That means that for just about any profile a person displays in answer to the MMPI, the clinician can probably find some study somewhere that correlates the profile with something--low self-esteem, perhaps, or maybe cigarette smoking or eating disorders.
Are these profiles meaningful? Oh, no. They are not even reliable. In fact, the reliability of MMPI code types falls apart after two weeks. Two weeks! From one-third to one-half of subjects tested didn't even have code types in the same diagnostic grouping on tests given two weeks apart. This is supposed to be a test of the enduring makeup of the personality? It is not completely unreasonable to suppose that adults might respond in much the same way from time to time on items questioning their religious or political beliefs, for example, but they don't. Numerous suties show that for normal college students, more than half show different profiles even when tested again only one to two weeks later? For psychiatric populations, the percentages who stay the same are even lower. After a year, the stability is laughable.
Undeterred by what others might see as crippling logical an empirical problems for both objective and projective tests, testing advocates slog ahead with revisions, elaborations, and embellishments of both objective and projective tests--especially the MMPI and the Rorschach--blinding the rest of us with a blizzard of code words and scoring systems."
All that quoted from Hagen, her pages 31 and 32, another big question her readers are left with is why didn't anyone at the University of Minnesota where the MMPI was invented raise the academic and scientific concerns Dr. Hagen raises, so the study would have never been published?
Clearly, the University of Minnesota (which isn't known for much beyond the MMPI) abandoned all academic and moral standards to even allow for a psychology department. What ought not to occur on a university campus occurs every day because what is overtly anti-intellectual is protected as an academic inquiry when its nothing more than a cult-fraternity. This is the purpose schools of psychology serve on campuses.
What other purpose do they serve that doesn't follow from the original purpose of fraud that so defines psychology?
"Neither clinical intuition nor any of the countless psychological tests currently in use and endlessly under development can possibly be held to be scientific instruments capable of providing precise and reliable data about the structure sand functions of the mind, normal or abnormal, in general or for individual cases. It is laughable and downright fraudulent to pretend otherwise. It is inconceivable that any scientists would tout such "instruments" as tools of their trade."
And so Dr. Hagen concludes there is no hope for clinical psychology, its entire history is one of shame, disgrace to all universities, fraud and indeed a crime against humanity for all the death, pain and suffering psychology has caused.
For more than 135 years, since the beginning of history, there have always been a significant number of people in any authority-establishment, in all societies, who have their positions of privilege because of cult mental retardation, cult autism replete with incest breeding such autism was favored in breeding so called intellectuals. Put another way, there has never been a government without some group within it which is also treasonous or defrauds the government.
Always, it seems, there has been such a group of people recorded in the histories of civilizations and for more than a century it has been obvious this group within Western civilization is psychology and all it's psychologists.
Regardless, Dr. Hagen explains, "Because we are all aware that our personal experience is limited, even when we have seen a number of instances that support our hypothesis we retain some doubt about our conclusions. In science, the attempt is made to reduce the quantity of doubt by sampling randomly from among all those Bouviers in the expectation that a random sample makes it more likely that the dogs seen will resemble those in the whole population of Bouviers more closely than would a sample based on nonrandom personal experience. In most clinical research, random sampling to reduce uncertainty and increase generalizability is not even an issue. Clinicians often generalize from single instances, from samples of one."
For 135 years, clinical psychology has been those people who pass through universities and earn degrees for being insane and having paid tuition in full, apparently. How else can their methodology and over a century of "work" qualify as academic?
Even in basketweaving and classes not associated with higher education, there is a sound methodology to produce a good or service if not science. With psychology, people are literally taught how to be academic frauds.
What everyone in society doesn't want to think about, equally as apparent as this more than a century old tradition of imbecile-intellects in Western civilization is, how all this fraud truly has been the direct cause of tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of deaths, millions of rapes and truly that much suffering. Society continues to tolerate psychology and so it is no surprise racist-fascism also lives on in American communities.
Dr. Hagen suggests racially profiling people, being racist, is normal and its not wrong to be racist and more about being a politically correct racist. She says, "Let us say that you are an American who has never known anyone Vietnamese. You know a fair amount about the Vietnamese because of our shared history, but you have never known, personally, an authentic Vietnamese person. It happens that you hire one to do some computer programming for your business. So you get to know the guy a little. And you notice that he has some priorities, or values, that are different from yours. Different religious practices. (He's Catholic.) Different attitudes about sex. (He's chaste.) Different work habits. (He works like a crazy Vietnamese boat person grateful to be in America). Different sense of family (He sends most of the pittance you pay him back to Vietnam to support his mother and father.) And different life goals. (He wants to reunite his family and make them proud by succeeding in computer science.) So he's rather different from you."
Her entire proposition here is that because a man has an ethnic background, there is a racial stereotype to discover which will also reveal his true character. She never mentions how a person who meets someone new and then engages in profiling them based upon an ethnic-national identity is denying that person the content of their character and being racist.
She doesn't point out how it would be best to get to know him as an individual, instead of formulating a stereotype by profiling him is both immoral and irrational thinking. This is all psychologists do when doing psychology.
Everything about her racism, how she confabulates a psyche by imposing a profile she makes of him, upon him is also a confabulation derived from nationality (in this case Vietnamese) but racism is also this idiomatic thought process of profiling a person based off ethnicity (which in this case she could have also said Asian and still been a racist).
The fact so many people are flat Earth morons, raised by their imbecile parents, sent to be educated by idiots and are surrounded by so many racist morons like themselves is the real point here, in addition to no real thought process or thinking going on in the brain of Dr. Hagen. She is sleepwalking, sleep-writing, void of sentience and yet with perception to approximate sentience.
In a world so full of people, in America there are few but in the world more than eight billion human beings all in need of resources, with most Americans being so out of it mentally, its remenicit of the movie The Matrix or some other dystopian science fiction where from cradle to grave people are encouraged by the society to be an amoral moron. Take your meds, its a dangerous world and you wouldn't want to act like it is.
"Tigers and Quicksand Is it sensible or foolish to generalize from a single experience? Say you meet your first tiger and it growls at you and charges, and you barely escape with your life by slamming the door of the cage shut just in time. How smart would you be to leave the cage door open and just stand there when you encounter your next tiger? Not smart. Not smart at all. If you survived the mauling and having your arm bitten off, people would say to you, "Just how many tigers do you have to meet before you get the idea? Because one should have been enough. You should have learned. How many times do you have to step in quicksand before you get the idea?"
Here, Dr. Hagen's conceit is the classic conceit of psychology: people are animals, the idea of being human is a mythology and really our behaviors are one of advanced primates like Chimpanzees.
This is true for people in the autism spectrum, as I will reveal in my coming book about sexual violence in the USA and how it is directly caused by the ill effects of industrial pollution over generations, in America. In this super toxic environment, particulate heavy metals saturating human brains, emotional intelligence is lost and the brain loses sentience--the ability to be objective.
If and when this occurs, human beings indeed lose their humanity. They become like a lower primate or non human primate.
Clearly, Dr. Hagen is suggesting people can be like tigers or quicksand and her subject and the subject of psychology is the human mind. The problem is, this is a terrible analogy betrays Dr. Hagen and all psychologists as mere bigots, people probably in the autism spectrum, who aren't sentient and so people seem like objects or animated profile-archetypes.
Not to get too much into what I address in my book, but the theory is this autism spectrum church-of-state psychology cult has been terrorizing humanity since it began and its always been a conspiracy of morons claiming they are helping people much like charlatan faith healers or worse, outright fascists like the psychiatrists in Hitler's SS.
Its never been a secret society, its always been a society within the greater society or a cult of autistic people who actively conspire to rule by fraud and terror, overthrow governments. Ironically, it was Hitler who accused the Jews of doing exactly what he and the Nazis actually did--the fear he inspired of Jews, he used to actually terrorize all Germans.
This frame up, or fascist worldview, is really more of an autism spectrum worldview want to define the world despite that view being insane and amoral. Its the way an unapologetic and autistic mind works. Psychology is religious autism, put another way. Dr. Hagen is clearly one of the church, with her politically correct racial profiling and treatment of human beings as if they were other species of animals or dangerous animated forces in nature.
She speaks of making generalizations about people, again as if its a matter of survival and if a person wasn't some kind of bigot-profiler they'd have to be a moron who won't survive long. "To make a reliable generalization to the whole group, one would need to study the behavior of many, randomly selected, and, one hopes, representative members of the group. In every science, the ability to generalize your finding depends on the quality of your instruments, but it also is only as good as your sampling techniques."
What Dr. Hagen fails to realize here is what most people realize and that is psychologists are knuckle dragging morons, the true Chimpanzees from the psychology lab insisting they are intellectuals and more so when compared to philosophers who have real brains and a mind for epistemology, ethics, logic and even ontology.
Other than the mathematics department, the only other place to find formal logic is as it was taught by Aristotle (sometimes called the father of science), in philosophy. Its either math, or formal logic as still taught by Aristotle, when it comes to logic.
I would have to think Aristotle and Plato would have hated Freud if Sigmund had lived in their times and even with Carl Jung by his side then too. For all Aristotle and Plato disagreed on, I think they would agree Freud and Jung were probably mentally retarded and both the products of incestuous breeding. Socrates probably would have murdered them both and without shame explained why, as they both insisted people were more like wild dogs.
Without digressing into further detail about quarreling, the real disagreement here is how even experimental psychologists with contempt for clinical psychology like Dr. Hagen are demonstrably insane and therefore amoral.
Human beings have always been and will always have, barring a dystopian future, characters. Each person has a set of beliefs and experiences, moods and a variety of aspects to their person which may be called their mind, soul or character. This will never also be a profile shared by someone else.
To have profiles for people not only demonstrates a lack of empathy, or the better part of the frontal cortex and limbic system not working as they should for a human being, but suggests people who compulsively profile others to get DNA sequenced for autism and an MRI brain map to test again for it in a truly double blind scientific way.
Psychologists are desperate this not occur and no such reform happens in healthcare. They want people to continue with psychiatric drugs with no known medical value and many known negative side effects. They don't want people to find out psychology has always been a stupid and evil game truly sick (genetically brain diseased) people have been playing it for about as long as the industrial pollution that causes it has been around.
Psychology coincides with industrialization. Psychologists were and are the new alchemists for the new industrial baron-royals. They are an anti-religious religion of science hating autism spectrum frauds from Sigmund Freud to Timothy Leary. They are dope fiends.
Otherwise, if a person were to agree with psychology then we have to accept a failed court system, institutional racism, profile everyone and get help from a psychologist to better conform to the political correctness of this pop culture fascism.
Dr. Hagen more or less is building this case in her book, by saying what she isn't saying--trusting her readers will employ logical inference despite the lack of logic in her own argument. It didn't work with me, obviously, just like Dr. Baron-Cohen's sophomore attempt to plagiarize Frederick Nietzsche for people with Asperger's syndrome failed.
I realize these are two of the most respected psychologists in the entire world and it is clear to me as it should be to everyone they are both morons and being a psychologist isn't really more than being a certified moron: university sponsored Fraud.
Although Dr. Baron-Cohen is British, he too is an example of a psychologist-psychiatrist highly respected in the field who has done enough (not more than enough) good work to outweigh his terrible work, same as Dr. Hagen. In his case, he is the neural psychiatrist who proves himself more of a clown and imposter for heavy intellectual labor than his more famous comedian brother Sasha Baron-Cohen.
His circulation of neurological science in his book "Zero Degrees of Empathy" and many You Tube videos, his lectures on the physical and genetic science of the brain as understood by strict neurologists is knowledge everyone should have even though his analysis of it is incorrect upon final analysis.
These and presumably other exceptions to the objective reality psychologists are criminal Frauds and Traitors (if they have a Constitution and nowhere in it does it establish a caste of psychologist-rulers), these exceptions for individuals cannot be extended to the many schools of psychology at so many universities.
They, logically, do not do more good than harm. Harms include death and no small number of them--homicide by negligence. You can't assign death an insurance value of say -10 points with another person's outcome after being handled by psychologists is a +1 happiness, didn't do anything to help the person but didn't hurt the person either and was sorta interesting talking to a shrink.
There is no measure to establish such a rubric.
The psychology schools must cease to exist, they must be abolished along with medical insurance coverage for psychology. Anything less is more crime against humanity along with the failed justice system--deadbeat, maladroit, henchmen for the autistic whom pass for the judiciary in the USA.
All student debts ought be forgiven too, for that collective "Trump University" Fraud throughout higher education in the USA, naked as so many psychology schools for all to see as a last digression from Dr. Hagen's thoughts on generalizing people as psychologists do--not to be confused with sociologists who are not Frauds and indeed statisticians.
Dr. Hagen further exposes the lack of science and a weak form of double blind verification compared to the double blind verification of an MRI and DNA sequence both independently confirming autism--that being a stronger example than she gives in this section.
"The Rosenthal Effect is simply the effect of expectations of both researches and subjects on the outcome of experiments. If the researchers who give sick patients little pink pills to make them better believe that the little pink pills will make them better, and if the patients believe that as well, better the patients will get. And this is true whether the little pink pills contain penicillin or white sugar. You get the effect you except to get. Any properly designed experiment uses "placebos," little pink pills that really are sugar for half the patients, and real pills for the other half, and neither researcher nor patient knows who is getting what. That's called a double blind experiment."
This is all true, of course. She goes on to speak more about clinical psychology being anti-scientific compared to experimental drug research-science, which doesn't actually meet the standard of science because it employs the Rosenthal Effect for control on such experiments. It has and will always take more than that to qualify a study as a science.
To be sure, these are not the same controls as exist for lab rats and if they are they are also necessarily criminal and more fascist than scientific.
"Strange too is the complete lack of any effort to make sure that all these questionnaires--there are thousands of them, with new ones being created every day--actually have anything to do with reality. They only ask people to "report" things as they see them. There is no cross-check to see if, for example, families reported to be abusive were truly abusive. The only subject matter for such "studies" is the question of whether students--or patients--are consistently negative positive when asked about a number of related issues. This activity gets people Ph.D.s in clinical psychology but is sure as heck isn't science."
OK, well, Dr. Hagen and I are agree clinical psychology is fraud and I'm also so convinced by her argument I wonder why insurance companies pay psychologists on medical claims. Where is the logic in that? She won't go that far to suggest the fraud she describes is also insurance fraud.
She says, "Definitions of concepts are so fluid, ever-changing with the whim of the speaker, and so utterly without any substantial basis that it is impossible to prove any claim, no matter how inconsistent with any other claim, to be wrong. As soon as any reasonable logical or evidentiary challenge is launched, the psychofact shape-shifts, assumes a new form, and heads off into unknown territory."
As a professional in the field she has so much contempt for, showing Dr. Hagen respect for how she sees herself in her book as the good experimental psychologist speaking out against the bad clinical psychologists, I understand why she says this.
The fact is, in the objective social and scientific reality juxtaposed to her mental health worldview, all diagnosis theories of psychologists are wrong. What they do is fraud and when that is pointed out they would simply turn their diagnosis against you, to punish you or at least throw a tantrum for being treated like complete and total medical insurance frauds.
Ultimately, the psychologist is the bully who cries wolf about bullies. They consider themselves experts on being human and knowing what human beings are like and about, as if they can see into souls and have training to effect this different from religious training. If you don't buy into their fraud, they will likely libel and make you a scapegoat for their patients-cult.
She writes, referring again to the case of the woman remember later in life her own father killing her childhood playmate, "Yet here we have Eileen Franklin claiming that the death of her friend Susan was a memory so horrible that it remained hidden from her mind's eye for twenty years. How could that be? What made Eileen's trauma so special that it wiped out her memory?
These are irrelevant questions Dr. Hagen thinks are relevant. Like in Kate Harding's book Asking For It rape victims deserve a criminal investigation and if it can be proven they made a false report then arrested for making a false rape report.
If their rape report can't be proven as true or false by the police, that doesn't matter, they still have to take the report and file it so the alleged victim has legal due process. Too often irrelevant questions or questions which are overreaching are the questions of psychologists be they experimental or clinical.
Eileen Franklin could have been scared, confused her own memory for a reoccurring dream again because of fear. Any number of possible legitimate explainations are reasons for the police to make a criminal report. Psychologists wrongfully, unconstitutionally, interrupt due process for people coming between them and the judiciary as intercessor. Its totally unconstitutional.
They are not expert witnesses they are more like escort servants only for deep conversations about what is most important in a person's life. Sometimes, and originally, they were also and formally pimps such as with Freud and Jung.
Dr. Hagen is hyper critical of Dr. Terr still, at page 39 as she personifies clinical psychology, saying, "You might think that Dr. Terr is saying that it will be easier for you to remember a single instance of rape if you have experiences only one than it will be if that instance is just one among dozens. She is not. Dr. Terr means that somehow an automatic mechanism of unconscious forgetting is triggered when you are a victim of multiple instances of abuse and not when you are the victim of only one or a few episodes. She is saying too that the traumatic amnesia is highly selective, applying in Eileen's case not to episodes of violent and unpredictable paternal violence, or to displays of maternal mental illness, but only to Susan Nason's death and some other unspecified but no doubt repeated traumas more horrible than drunken assaults but less horrible than murder."
For my part and again to recall the feminist critique of rape culture by Kate Harding, both Dr. Hagen and Dr. Terr are over presuming imbeciles who like whores for attention, monopolize the conversation on trauma or want to instead of simply having a reasonable standard in our courts such people know what trauma is and witnesses simply testify to it without the autistic-expert opinion.
When women or children or anyone reports a crime to the police the police are obligated to make a report and the courts are failed to rely on psychologists to test for competence as that is demonstrative incompetence on the part of the judge. This is logic not dispute with science.
Its clearly autistic for behavior if not also genetic autism for the motivation people have to be psychologists of any type. That compulsion to profile people which is also and necessarily to deny them the content of their character and impose a profile upon them to adopt, like subordinate or domesticated animals, is a genetic brain disease and attitude towards people that is very like if not genetic autism.
If its not, its people who have lost their intelligible mind despite having proper grammar and punctuation, again like Freud. When will Western universities realize their schools of psychology are so many "Orders of the Golden Dawn" and ritual fraud societies, Freud more like Alister Crowley than a scientist they will go bankrupt.
Philosophy, the love of wisdom, isn't a discipline for a career outside academic philosophy and so many have said its a worthless degree. Still, without a firm grounding in logic people are likely to be taken in by all types of frauds, more than professional psychologists.
Of those, Dr. Hagen herself suggests this in her book and yet she and her colleagues make our universities morally bankrupt and eventually, as science has a history of destroying psychology, cause financial bankruptcy.
I suppose in that worst case scenario the psychologists could say its better to have spent money made through fraud than to have never spent that much money at all?
Hagen explains how frauds for scientific experts have made justice more a gamble than rational process with causes and effects for human behavior understood in a context of responsibility--where people are actually held accountable for their actions.
She points out how clinical psychologists effectively summon an identity, like a conjuror, for our courts as judges and juries are easily convinced by these performances. It is normal just like expert religious testimony was normal for people in Salem during the witch trials.
"Fluid definitions like that are clever but they do not make cross-examination of psychoexperts impossible. Changing definitions case by case and expert by expert makes any claim about the effects of trauma consistent with every other claim..... Dr. Terr took this nonsense into court. Dr. Terr got a man convinced of murder on the basis of her clinical intuition, buttressed and complemented by her selective perception of the interesting story her client told to her. It was no problem at all with a theory so insubstantial and research that is no more than the intuitive biases of its expositors," she says.
Dr. Hagen is oblivious to how she is making Dr. Terr more at issue than the murdered nine year old girl, grown woman who says she remembers her father killing her, decades later and the convicted murderer as I read her.
Although I agree with and Dr. Hagen is right to point out the witch-trial or show-trial this case represents because of Dr. Terr's complete and total arrogance to presume psychic knowledge and give that as expert testimony is worse than the murder of a nine year old child because it is also evidence of a failed judiciary, Dr. Hagen still misses the point about a woman's right press charges for alleged crimes.
The police should have took Eileen's testimony and Dr. Terr was and should have been treated as irrelevant or hearsay witness testimony. The fact Dr. Terr's testimony was taken seriously by the courts, something Dr. Hagen is against and her entire book an attempt to rid the courts of expert-clinical psychologists, ironically has everything to do with how Dr. Hagen has conflated a difference between scientific-experimental and clinical psychology.
The judges obviously believe the relationship between the two schools of psychology is professional and licensed so when a psychologist comes to court its been vetted, by experts.
Dr. Hagen points out there is no science and all clinical psychology is, is total opinion; yet she fails to realize the same is true of experimental psychology with the caveat all psychological testimony diminishes human beings to mere primates with behavior understood by observation such as with Jane Goodall and chimpanzees. Psychology always does that, for expert testimony, regardless of whether or not its experimental or clinical testimony.
Dr. Hagen is quite sure clinical psychology is fraud in court and its so common that our courts are causing more harm than good, more injustice than justice, every time they call upon psychologists as expert witnesses. Her book is a knife in the beating heart of clinical psychology, and her language is professional and combative so there can be no doubt.
Still she fails to realize, in addition to necessarily diminishing human beings to be mere primates, it also conflates a difference between scientific-experimental psychologists and clinical psychologists. In court, the lines are blurred because if they were not then all psychologists would no longer be considered science nor a science with experts to testify.
She doesn't realize this for many reasons: 1.) non linear rationalization doesn't actually make rational, logical, experimental psychology. 2.) She herself stated most psychologists have done some experimental psychology work and all have done at least some clinical work, professionally, while both depend on each other to produce the DSM-5. 3.) The weak controls on ethical experimental psychological research do not factually qualify for science and weak controls never will so experimental psychology can't be scientific without also forsaking morality.
These three reasons are worth recalling as her argument compounds her huge blind spot, academically speaking and with all due respect to the University of Boston where we are all lucky she teaches and has published this book.
Speaking to the foundations of clinical diagnostic techniques she says, "Consider just the shocking but indisputable fact that it is a rare to find agreement across clinicians or clinics on the results of psychiatric evaluations, on the basic mental diagnosis itself so central to countless criminal defenses and claims of psychological injury."
"We Can Explain Everything Science is evaluated as science not solely by its definitions and methodology--where clinical psychology fails spectacularly--but also by its explanatory adequacy--where it truly excels. Clinical psychologists, from Freud to the present, provide us with wonderfully plausible and comprehensive explanations of any and all aspects of human behavior. Of course, so do novelists," she writes.
With that financially irrelevant philosophy also and usually comes a foundation in the European classics so more than clinical psychologists being novelists, because of their role in courts and society, they are literally functioning sycophants.
The psychologist is a modern sycophant with the express ambition to defraud the Court, to gain advantage in courtrooms by persuading judges with their dual clinical-experimental, anti-intellectual cargo capitalism.
In the USA the truth is most judges prefer a psychic expert, someone they can defer their judgement to be that to determine competence, guilt or innocence or even a sum of money to be awarded as damages. This is the evidence and logic that is US jurisprudence, sadly.
Who is to blame, the incompetent judge or the psychologist who defrauds the court? Dr. Hagen doesn't expressly address this question in her book.
Instead, we get the "unicorn argument," from Dr. Hagen. " It is what I call the Unicorn Argument....For example, I might say, "there's no such thing as unicorns." you say, "Of course there are unicorns. They are always kissing virgins." "No," I say. "I have looked everywhere and cannot find a single unicorn." "you have not looked everywhere, and even if you did, the unicorns were one step ahead of you." Stymied, aren't I? You must be right. There are unicorns all over the place just beyond the edge of my vision."
This through process being anti-intellectual compared to a mind of a scientist referring to hard sciences, she says, "The scientist believes nothing unless it is proven to be true."
This is obviously not true. Dr. Hagen, here, demonstrates another total break with reality--the very scientific-objective reality she is want to talk about as she believes it includes experimental psychology if only psychology would make clinical psychologists thralls without expertise to gather data for experimental psychologists to then "scientifically" analyze and or use to prescribe drug-medication.
Most if not all scientists are only scientists part of the time. They are not full time in an objective-scientific state of awareness. Scientists are people who believe all sorts of things which they don't know are true.
They make business transactions and trust themselves to get what they paid for and get paid for what they produce. In businesses there are countless beliefs people have which they don't know to be true, such is the nature of the stock market.
So, here it is clear to me Dr. Hagen has made a religion out of science, or has religiously appropriated science and calls that experimental psychology. I call it religious because it is entirely a matter of her faith as she is blinded by her own ambition to produce justice.
Most clinical psychologists too, believe they are doing the work of justice when they testify as experts even when they know their clinical relationship didn't produce real expert testimony, they intend to be experts and this enough to qualify them as experts, or psychics in their own minds.
Dr. Hagen, who thinks the argument I make is absurd and she no doubt would have some "diagnosis" to explain why I disagree with her instead of engage in linear logic as proceeds from her thesis that clinical psychology is fraud. My argument she objects to is psychology is indeed a religion and exactly the same as alchemy or astronomy was in times past, a way for elites to circumvent justice and afford gatekeepers to privilege.
My argument aside, she writes about astronomy being similar to clinical psychology but not experimental psychology, "Almost since its inception, clinical psychology has been subjected to the same criticism. It's not a testable science, it's a secular religion disguised as a science. And, since the first utterance of this presumably crippling criticism, the defense reply has been, "Oh you academics are always saying that." It is time to drop the charge that clinical psychology is nothing more than a secular religion. It has always fallen on deaf ears and it will continue to do so."
Here, Dr. Hagen is an outright and shameless bigot to suggest what she does, as if she and the schools of psychology at every university in Western civilization are beyond such a reproach. They, the psychologists, will never be defrocked of their sycophant authority as they haven't ever before not in some 135 years nor ever will they!
"Mein Fuhur...... I can walk!" To quote the final scene of Stanley Kubrick's Dr. Strangelove or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb.
Dr. Hagen and the psychologists have been right all along! They will continue to gain increasing control over each other now they have overcome the obstacles of science and the courts!
Why shouldn't she be totally confident in her thesis and premise here?
It is because the argument I will not continue to develop in this essay on her book, the argument that she and all psychologists are Traitors and guilty of Felony Conspiracy to Commit Treason and Fraud as a matter of fact: science, logic and sentient people who are moral and so more than mere primates. This is why she shouldn't be so confident.
Indeed psychology is too weak for its controls to be science in the academic sense of the word, or it is Nazi-psychology without ethics.
Despite the popularity of Neo-nazism in the USA and its continued rise in popularity such President Biden calls white supremacists (Nazis) the greatest national security threat, would I be a fool to also suggest that too will change and become less popular along with fascist mental healthcare?
She ridicules astrologers as if they are all necessarily fools, as if no astrologers would be an exception such as an astrologer who cautions a person who would otherwise take whichever astrological reading too seriously.
Clearly, and I've met more than one such astrologer, there are astrologers like that and Dr. Hagen can't even see the best part of herself (her good intentions) in anyone who might be a professional astrologer even though both psychology and astrology rely heavily on talk-therapy for understanding.
She says, "It is entertaining but absurd to imagine our courtrooms filled with astrologers testifying that Leos wold never commit murder when the sun is in Jupiter or that Capricorns make better parents for Virgos than do Geminis. Very few adherents of astrology would attempt to get astrological interpretations, in general terms or for specific individuals, accepted in court as expert testimony. (Or would they?)."
I think Dr. Hagen's faith in experimental psychology is weaker than she lets on in her book to be so damning of clinical psychology--which she is right to do and ought to be commended for even if also compared to Oscar Schindler or a Nazi who knew Nazism was fraud and immoral but still couldn't walk away from all that power.
She says, quoting Dr. Hagen at length:
"Yet we not only tolerate but welcome testimony from clinical psychologists that, like astrological interpretation, is built on nothing more than faith..... It is profoundly disturbing that clinical psychologists are themselves unable to maintain this critical distinction between fact and belief, between astronomy and astrology, as their testimony on the witness stands in courtroom after courtroom shows. How can educated people so blind themselves to the reality of their own belief system?
All professionals who identify themselves as psychologists share a common problem. They cannot study what they so desperately want to study, the structures and functions of the mind. They don't want to be philosophers who create elegant logical arguments about the nature of the mind, the nature of reality, and relations between the two. Oh, no. Philosophers get no respect these days. If you go to a party and say that you are interested in whether there will be a sound if a tree falls in the forest and there is no one around to hear it, your fellow party guests will walk away mumbling under their breath, "Get a job."
"In today's America, psychologists must be scientists. But, alas, they are scientists with no direct access to their subject matter and not a hope in hell of ever getting one. What experimental psychologists do, most of them, is compromise. If they wish to study an inaccessible mental process like what little babies pay attention to out in the world, for example, they define "attention" in terms of something that they can actually measure, like the amount of time the babies spend looking at one thing or another."
Infantilism is another way to describe the process of denying people their character and imposing a profile-archetype onto them. To give a person a diagnosis on what type of person they are or push as science the belief no person has an authentic character and the diagnosis of the psychologist is true character of a person.
Infantilism is the master-slave, or therapist-patient/client relationship consistent with the paternalism inherent in the judiciary. No judiciary could exist if the there weren't a paternalism the state assumes, with all citizens being like it's children.
Infantilism of adults, or the imposition of a child-character/profile on an adult patient takes what the judiciary necessarily does out of paternalism one step farther. It makes unnecessary and irrational infantilization of adults to domesticate people like animal-pets. What else is political correctness?
Dr. Hagen, never saying clinical psychology is politically correct and so as political correctness enjoys the privilege of expert scientific testimony in court. She explains it thusly:
"It is bewildering but true that despite the incessant claims that clinical psychology is a science with its findings soundly based on scientific methodology, clinicians challenged in court often revert to a flat-out denial of the status."
They don't want to purger themselves even though the odds are almost nonexistent they would be prosecuted for perjury. This is obvious and yet Dr. Hagen never mentions perjury despite all her talk of Fraud as witness testimony. Strange how her mind works.
***THIS WILL BE CONTINUED, later, for a full chapter by chapter break down of Dr. Hagen's book. Further academic publications which could also be used to prove psychiatry is indeed Treason against the Constitution and government against the United States of America, is the documentary by THE MARKETING OF MADNESS ARE WE ALL INSANE The Marketing of Madness: Are We All Insane? (cchr.org) and multiple documentaries about mental healthcare in the USA found on RT, Russian Television or Ruptly. This is only a review of the first two chapters, the other chapters providing more evidence for why it is both Treason and Fraud. ***
Comments
Post a Comment