The 1960s comprised a period of great upheaval and change in the west. Two major groups that underwent significant change were the Catholic church and the field of psychology.
Psychology
Sigmund Freud’s ideas of psychoanalysis were still relatively new and boundaries were being tested as his ideas became incorporated into mainstream psychology. Freud created methods of changing behavior through dialogue between patient and psychoanalyst, which included different techniques such as free association, unconscious redirection of feelings or transference, dream analysis, and various techniques of awakening the subconscious mind.
Catholic Church
The Catholic church also went through its most significant change in centuries. Vatican II, a discussion and transformation of the church that lasted from 1962 to 1965, resulted in a significant liberalization of church views and policy, including the end of Latin Mass, a change to priests facing the congregation during Mass, retiring of certain church clothing, artwork, regalia and music, a decree to open dialogue with other religions, and various decrees to the priests and laity.
The church was reacting to significant social and political changes in the aftermath of the first and second world wars, dissolution of colonies, rise of the Cold War superpowers, and the spread of industry and technology, and in 1959, Pope John XXIII convened the Council shortly after his election as pontiff.
Eliminated in Vatican II
The history of psychoanalysis and Vatican II are outside the scope of this article, but suffice it to say that both were reactions to a rapidly changing society and were attempting to solve problems facing people of the time.
The church had dominated Western religion for centuries, and was fighting the loss of believers to other religions. The church took steps to improve its image, and to be more modern and flexible. In this spirit, the Convent of the Immaculate Heart in Los Angeles, one of the largest seminaries in America, agreed to allow a group of radical psychotherapists to try a personal liberation experiment.
Encounter Workshops
Convent of the Immaculate Heart, California
The focus of the project included “weekend encounter workshops” with several hundred of the nuns, sessions of truth-telling and ice-breaking group exercises. One of the key tools in psychological control is getting someone to express secrets to you. Women use this in relationships, making the man feel comfortable so that he will open up and tell her all his secrets, weaknesses, and fears, which can later be used against him.
The Church of Scientology holds intensive sessions where the childhood and detailed sexual history of every member are probed and documented. The psychoanalysts had found a very powerful tool, and the nuns were eager to be perceived as modern, willing participants.
Carl Rogers
Carl Rogers, founder of client-centered psychology
Carl Rogers of the Education Innovation Project was the chief psychoanalyst leading the study. Rogers was one of the leading psychologists of the time, having authored “On Becoming A Person” 1961 and “Toward a Psychology of Being” with the renowned Abraham Maslow in 1962.
Rogers and Maslow received funding from the US government, especially clandestine agencies such as the Office of Naval Research. Their work was derivative of Freud’s theories, and the focus was on therapy where the client solved his own problems, with minimal interference or guidance from the analyst. This technique, known as nondirective counseling, has become very popular (see any Woody Allen movie or The Sopranos) and basically allows the patient, with very little guidance, to arrive at his own solutions and conclusions.
It was seen as a less harsh version of Freud’s clinical psychoanalysis. While much of Rogers work stands up today, and his theories were designed to help clients solve problems, not disintegrate cohesive groups, the power of his theory was about to be proven, and in 1966 the Immaculate Heart nuns were about to face a far more powerful force than any temptation they had overcome so far.
The nuns operated in a hierarchy, with a Mother Superior who unquestioningly ran the convent, and tiers of nuns who did their obligatory duties without question. During the encounter workshops, the nuns were told that they shouldn’t be reserved or shy, that they should open up, that prudence is an oversold virtue, don’t avert your eyes to the ground in piety, but to make eye contact and open up with their inner desires, feelings, and emotions.
The nuns, being people after all, and imperfect, did open up and revealed things about times of weakness, theft of drinks out of the refrigerator, secret things they had not discussed before.
Creeping Change
Innocent but not impervious
After the weekend retreats, the nuns would inevitably ponder them during the week, and slowly began questioning authority and further exploring their thoughts and decisions. One nun, Jeanne Cordova, who was sent out into Skid Row by the Mother Superior, began questioning authority and developed a bitterness for her new assignment, stating:
They promised me monastic robes, glorious Latin liturgy, the protection of the 3 sacred vows, the peace of saints in a quiet cell, the sisterhood of a holy family. But I entered religious life the year John XXIII was taking it apart: 1966… destroying in the name of CHANGE, my dreams. Delete Latin ritual. Dump the habit. Damn holy obedience. Send nuns and priests out into the REAL world. If I had wanted the real world, I’d have stayed in it.
Taboo Temptations
And then of course, the most taboo topic of all, the analysts tapped into the nuns’ repressed sexual energy. The nuns were assumedly mostly if not all virgins, and many had never been kissed before. Their sexuality was something that the church confined and restrained, and was very good at doing so. However, many of the younger nuns were impressionable and curious, and the questioning of the analysts inevitably lead them to the natural human urges of the flesh.
Some of the nuns, freed by the encounter workshops, stopped wearing their habits. As nuns were no longer required to go to Mass at 6:30 AM, some of them stopped. As the ritual and framework of religious practice faded away, the sisters turned to each other for support, and inevitably, some of these relationships turned sexual.
One of the nuns kissed and seduced a classmate, and then, finding the exciting pleasures of human sexuality, while driving back from a grocery trip, leaned over and kissed the Mistress of Novices on the lips.
As Rogers explained:
In mixed intensive workshops positive and warm, loving feelings frequently develop between members of the encounter group and, naturally enough, these feelings sometimes occur between men and women. Inevitably, some of these feelings have a sexual component and this can be a matter of great concern to the participants and … a profound threat to their spouses.
As the church was struggling with its new modernity, it instructed the nuns to “be open to their feelings” in the encounter groups–a reasonable enough sounding instruction. However, some of these feelings were inevitably sexual, and as the order no longer prohibited certain friendships, they flourished.
Sister Mary Benjamin stated that she turned to a priest to seek council from these growing feelings, and the priest, also bewildered by the spirit of Vatican II and the changing times, refused to pass judgment and left it up to her to decide whether her actions were good or bad. When she revealed she was worried about developing a terrible crush on Eva, Eva responded “Great! Enjoy it!” A sexual relationship ensued, followed by a painful breakup, and Sister Mary then left the Catholic Church.
Within a year, over 300 nuns petitioned the Vatican to be released from their vows. One nun, Sister Genevieve, began a sexual relationship with one of the therapists named Harry, who soon divorced his wife and had the former nun move in with him. With over half the nuns gone, the remaining nuns became radical lesbian activists. The convent soon closed, and remained vacant for years until it announced in 2015 the building will be sold to Katy Perry.
Feminism Is Destruction Of Institutions
Sexual psychology was able to obliterate a group of God-fearing, pious, virginal women who wished only to help others and serve God. The feminist beliefs postulated in this experiment have been quickly spread through the rest of our society.
It is worth noting that the US federal government funded and aided this research. If a group of hundreds of nuns can be convinced to renounce their vows and become radical lesbians within only a year of exposure, is it any wonder we are living in a sea of slutted, tatted, pierced, used up, unkind, narcissistic women?
And if the pure and innocent nuns fall victim, the rest of society has no chance. Feminism and its ideas must be stopped at their root. The fight should be directed not towards the feminist herself, but to those spreading feminist ideas in media, schools, art, culture, and religion.
For more, see:
There is a Policeman Inside All of Our Heads, He Must Be Destroyed, Adam Curtis. In the 1960s, a radical group of psychotherapists challenged the influence of Freudian ideas, which lead to the creation of a new political movement that sought to create new people, free of the psychological conformity that had been implanted in people’s minds by business and politics.
An encounter between psychology and religion: Humanistic psychology and the Immaculate Heart of Mary nuns, The Journal of The History of the Behavioral Sciences, Vol 41 Issue 4 Fall 2005 p 347-365.
Read More: Cardinal Raymond Leo Burke Rebukes Feminization Of Catholic Church
There was a really good book written about this topic that I read way back in the 1990s. The woman who wrote the book was a former Nun who essentially said that many of the american convents had become bastions for non-believing feminists who were setting out to destroy the catholic church from inside. I think her name was dietrich or something like that…very insightful book
Goes along well with my NWO gay priest implant theory
who knows..perhaps..nothing would surprise me
I certainly would not want to live the life of a celibate priest or nun. However, it is good if a small number of people in society embrace the ideal of total self-mastery. Rather than simply embracing a Darwinian ideal that we are just monkeys with a meat mind. Such spiritualty and self-discipline can give institutions some credibility. I sometimes wonder if NWO did not plant fag priests to undermine society.
For 99 percent of humanity, traditional marriage provided an outlet where you could exercise some restraint, build civilization, enjoy the material world, have a family, sex life etc.
But we can already see the outline of the “new ethics” which discourages use of “he” and “she”. Fortunately, those pushing this have such hideous like goblin appearances that this new “esthetic” may be slow to catch on no matter how many feminazis get behind it. A fat lesbian with weird body shape and orc facial features look repulsive to most of us. (I remember a somewhat pretty lesbian I knew 30 years ago. Saw her for the 1st time since 80’s, and she had acquired that obese “she goblin” look.
I think that the best thing those who want to defend the natural god-given DNA have going for us is that the natural DNA of truth begets beauty.
Catholic Church died at the Second Vatican Council, it’s quite sad but it’s the truth. It’s not the council itself but the fact it gave in all around to all the hippy bullshit to try and “re-invigorate” the heathens and modern monsters. Unfortunately this had the unintended effect of making religious people even less devout.
Anything that’s good, wholesome, moral, and decent has been undergoing a blatant strong-armed attack for the past 60 years. I would say the fact they still survive against the onslaught is pretty incredible. I don’t know if anyone plays Warhammer 40k but essentially the Imperium is ruled by an emperor on life support who is barely alive. This is a great metaphor for the Catholic Church, worshiping an ideal that’s barely alive anymore.
My main problem with Catholicism is that is does focus too much on certain issues (like let’s say abortion or gay marriage) but not on divorce which has caused suffering to billions worldwide. The fact that the Church essentially goes with whatever the mainstream liberal dogma states is a horrendous sign. The church having a “live and let live” liberal mindset(aka the apathy mindset) has devastated them more than any other religion or belief system. For example the Pope, a figure that is supposed to represent all that is good with tradition and God, is essentially a SJW. I can’t believe anyone doesn’t see through the monumental scam that modern Catholicism has become.
R.I.P. Catholic Church, you had a good run.
The Second Vatican Council was merely a distraction so that the Vatican could cover-up it’s involvement in giving Franco, Hitler, and Mussolini their rise to power.
In reality, the council changed nothing, as the “canon law” that makes the Vatican equally homicidal to the Koran is still in existence. The law that condemns heretics (True Christians like me) to death was merely put on hold, buts it’s still there, waiting for the next inquisition, which will happen after the Rapture (Thankfully), and the back of Islam gets broken due to it’s failed attack on Israel during WW3.
Why don´t you read before you comment ignorant protestant. By the way no real Christian believes the B.S. of Rapture, a jewish heresy, a fabrication. Sorry but you will stay to enjoy the show (if we are in the Last Days). In the meantime you can go and lick the boots of your Israeli masters, along with the heretics that now run the Vatican and destroyed the institution, at least the most visible part.
1 Thessalonians 4:16-17 (NEW Testament)
16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.
Obviously reading comprehension is not your forte, since it only says the the good will taken with Christ at the end of the World aka the Second Coming. The believers will have to survive and soldier on through the tribulations, the kingdom of the Antichrist and all that. Sorry pal, should we find ourselves in the last days you will get to enjoy the show.
John Nelson Darby and his plymouth bethren church invented the pre-tribulation rapture and dispensationalism.
The boost of the pre tribulation rapture heresy was given with the publication of the “Scoffield Bible”, supported by certain interests…
http://www.israelshamir.net/shamirReaders/english/Cathail–Scofield-Zionist-Bible.php
Doctrine doesn’t matter, people do
Doctrine such as feminism would say it’s a movement to make men and women equal. Real life tells us that it is much more than that. And you believe in the rapture, haha, what’s next, urine therapy?
“And you believe in the rapture…”
16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.
.
1 Thessalonians 4:16-17
Christ promised that His TRUE followers will escape before the shit REALLY hits the fan, which brings me comfort. I pray you will escape too.
If that were the case, the book of Revelations would not mention those good people who will refuse to submit to the Beast (as well as the warnings of Christ, telling its disciples how they will be persecuted and killed for his name) and die for it. You are the one who rejects the biblical teaching.
Those are the people who accept Christ as Lord in the Tribulation – many of whom will come to faith when they realize that the Rapture was real after all.
Exhibit A:
Yes Sigmund Freud and his filthy ilk has corrupted the feeble mind of the womenfolk. So it’s up to us red blooded males to train them to be submissive and in line with their biological urges.
I make sure my wife see me as the center of her universe. She dutifully prepare my food and pour drinks for me. After I’m exhausted from work and play she place my feet on her bosom and give me a relaxing massage. I make all the financial decisions. And definitely no joint bank account. She does all this cuz I work and play hard. The moment you start pandering to womens unscrupulous demands they will start to hate you
Ding! Ding! Ding!
Ladies and gentlemen…we have a winner.
Don’t be so fast to consider them dead. Remember back when they had a freaking POPE who was elected by a faction that was openly opposed to the current doctrine? It happened before and they survived that too.
The Catholic Church can not die. This was promised by its founder Jesus Christ. The so called “Catholic” Church right now is a sham and a usurpation of the Real Church, they are NOT Catholic even if they use the name. The actual Catholic Church is still alive although it is dormant and hidden underground.
It seems to me that the villain of this piece is not feminism as we generally understand it but radical liberation doctrine, which trended toward a sort of induced individual chaos before feminism became an important force.
Individualism has often been misinterpreted to favor this kind of chaotic abandonment of promises and responsibilities. Radical liberation doctrine emphasizes a pernicious degree of personal autonomy that dismisses the importance of all commitments, past, present, or future. It puts me in mind of the Doukhobor phenomenon of a century ago…and not in a good way.
This is fucking excellent. I was raised with a bunch of this touchy feely psych lite shit as a kid in California, and I was suspicious of it even then!
I remember telling my mom when I was in the first grade that I didn’t like when she “used psychology on me.” Even kids know when something is off.
Had no effect though. Had to endure a childhood of it. I remember in middle school when a friend at church whispered to me like a dissident planning rebellion:
“There’s way too much sharing going on here.”
It is important to bring this stuff to light and expose whole new generations to the bullshit of the sixties that is still affecting their lives.
The arrogance.
Many Catholic orders still follow the Rule of Saint Benedict (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_Saint_Benedict) which has been around since the early five fucking hundreds, and if it wasn’t working, would have been abandoned for something else.
The arrogance of someone like Rogers to believe that the shit he scribbled on the back of a napkin was worthy of replacing a tradition that had been around for a millenium and half is the beginning of a new tradition that we are still living under the influence of:
The Rule of the New.
Actually, it isn’t a tradition. It is an unconscious article of faith. Precedence is given to any idea no one has ever heard of.
And before you know it, Caitlyn Jenner is pope.
It seems young boys in general are keenly aware to this touchy feely bullshit and steer away from it. We had a few incidents like this at my church as a kid and I remember openly mocking it. Not in a malicious way but more of a “YES LETS ALL SHARE OUR FEELINGS AND THEN WE CAN BRAID EACH OTHERS HAIR!” kind of way.
We should bond over this by not hugging.
You mean a millennium and a half?
Yeah. Thanks
i remember reading stories from the bible and realising early on that the whole thing was horseshit.
And I’m sure your mental abilities have not developed much since
i do have an m.sc. in economics..but otherwise you are probably right.
So did Huck Finn, even if he had to have them read to him.
This is important. A lot of people here confuse the symptom with the problem.
Ok. We acknowledged the problem. Now we need a strategy to tackle the problem. We need to teach all men the hypocrisy with feminism since the men are the ones negatively affected by it directly. It’s easier to convince them than women.
Men’s weakness is pussy. This is where sexbots are needed most. Once you satisfy that urge, women would have no control over men and their feminism BS will gradually disappear.
Women are directly negatively affected by feminism. They are more unhappy than they’ve ever been.
http://www.nber.org/papers/w14969
Agreed, but these are women. They can’t see it. They know they should marry a good man, but fucks the degenerate bad boy over and over again and wonders why she can’t have a family. Then it’s too late and still thinks it’s not her fault that men don’t find her as a good wife material.
It’s that “you can have it all” flavor of feminism when in reality having it all means being on a family, work, family, workout, treadmill from 5:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. They’re unhappy because they’re exhausted and take their issues out on their men who were smart enough to not buy into that 24/7 hamster wheel lifestyle.
This is basically a swinging of the ideological pendulum. Psychology and counseling, as a practice, are doomed to fail in current western culture, and then a more scientific approach will take its place. This culture of mild alcoholism and escalating reliance on psychotropic medication, will only serve to hasten society’s decline. Allowing this decline to proceed in the only way to discover what pieces remain to rebuild the discipline of psychology.
Rogers and Maslow were far from Freudian Psychologists, they basically created the branch of Humanistic Psychology which is related closely with the New Age and the Human Potential Movement and all the self-help crap, and recently the new branch of Positive Psychology.
Basically, that kind of psychology and pseudo-psychology is all about feeling good in the moment, no matter if you’re not actually getting results or working towards something, you should feel good and enjoy the present. Kinda like a YOLO attitude.
I dislike those kind of workshops and/or seminars because people left them “feeling good” but in a few days feel like crap again. So they again return to those places but they are not actually working towards making changes in their lives, they are only seeking good feelings, which tend to progress into selfishness and self-centeredness.
Hence the rampant use of recreational drugs. The reward is immediate, yet temporary.
Yes, Rogers and Maslow are Humanists, from the Humanist School of psychology. I learned about Skinner and Behaviorism first, and had some initial respect for psychology as a science, but then when I got to Maslow/Rogers and humanism I figured out that the vast majority of psychology (Freudianism, trait psychology, cognitivism) is just really shitty philosophy and not science at all. For example, Maslow’s famous pyramid of human needs (still promoted today) has been totally falsified by modern research, and all his notes and work on the pyramid reveal that his model was based on nothing more than his own conjecture.
All the useful stuff that comes out of psychology is from behaviorism and neurology, behaviorism is taboo in our radically autonomous degenerate culture, and neurology is not psychology. In the beginning I wanted to be a psychologist, and my dear ol mom even offered to send me to college for it, but I figured out that I could instead be a psychologist that psychoanalyzes psychologists, also known as a philosopher. (And I could learn philosophy for free in the library instead of spending mommy’s money.)
I’m a psychologist, and you’re not wrong. There are a lot of stupid stuff within the field, theories that have been long disproved that still remain popular with the “experts” and the lay man alike, and if you add all the pseudo-psychology crap that the public at large is more familiar with, then we are in big trouble.
“For example, Maslow’s famous pyramid of human needs (still promoted
today) has been totally falsified by modern research, and all his notes
and work on the pyramid reveal that his model was based on nothing more
than his own conjecture.”
Where can I read about this?
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=maslow+pyramid+falsified
http://donaldclarkplanb.blogspot.com/2012/04/maslow-1908-1970-hierarchy-of-needs-5.html
Thanks 😉 Maslow’s 5 needs model parallels the pancha-kosh model in yoga psychology and his 7 needs model parallels the 7 chakra system. While not as thorough as those models devised by ancient sages, his models are still somewhat useful as a template.
I agree. A philosophical rather than a psychological approach to life is much healthier. A me centered psychology that just wants you to feel good and positive all the time is a bit like trying to solve a BO issue by constantly using a deodorant rather than having a good all body wash. Unhappy and unpleasant things happen to every human being, this is what reality is all about, it tests a person’s strength and fortitude. Your character develops and you realize with time that after a while there’s no much that can bring you down anymore, you’re meant to experience the good, the bad and the ugly. For example during difficult times in my life I read a lot of stoical philosophy, some Carl Jung, exercised a lot, I listen to music like J.S Bach until I understood his greatness and appreciated every note of it,,,essentially I adopted a philosophical approach that saw me through.
Cognitive Psychotherapy and specially REBT have strong roots in stoicism and some part of Buddhism, it tends to be very logical and straightforward, one of the reasons I practice it.
But you’re correct, psychology can’t give an approach to life, it can only give you tools to help you get where you wanna go. It’s the motivational speakers, the self-help quacks, some counselors and pseudo-psychotherapists that tell you how you “should” live, by buying their products of course and pursuing a hedonistic path of feeling good.
I’ve always liked stoicism as a philosophy. It’s very sturdy and measured but also modest too- it’s a real soldier’s philosophy- might lack something in imagination but nevertheless it’s 100% reliable.
Psychology doesn’t give you a “path” in life- in fact I think a lot of popular me-centered self help psychology has regressed people back into the state of passive guiltless victims- it’s not my fault but my parents, the church, the white privileged society…..it’s terribly sad, their lives become a torrent of twisted resentments against every other thing but themselves. Avoid these people in life, most are incurable…I actually think sports and the arts are much more successful ways of dealing with these issues, especially in young people. Makes you wonder at the life time of damage that pop psychology has done to people.
What is REBT?
Rational Emotive Behavioral Therapy, developed by Albert Ellis in 1955.
“Men are disturbed not by things, but by the view which they take of them.” ~Epictetus
“There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so”. ~Shakespeare
“We teach people that they upset themselves. We can’t change the past, so we change how people are thinking, feeling and behaving today.”~Albert Ellis
“I get people to truly accept themselves unconditionally, whether or not their therapist or anyone loves them.”~Albert Ellis
“There are three musts that hold us back: I must do well. You must treat me well. And the world must be easy.” ~Albert Ellis
“I had used eclectic therapy and behavior therapy on myself at the age of 19 to get over my fear of public speaking and of approaching young women in public.”~Albert Ellis
“There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so”
That’s moral relativism and I disagree with it.
If you want to look at it that way, yes. However, the phrase doesn’t exist in isolation for you to analyze, but in conjunction with the others serves an example of how, it is your thoughts not the situations per se that leads you to feel, act or think a certain way about the situation. Different people react differently to the same situation.
What you said is certainly echoed in some wings of Existential Psychology…i.e European Existential Psychology which is critical of humanistic models and their fluffy, do what you just feel approaches. There is much more focus on developing and using meaning in your life to serve a bigger purpose, whatever that maybe for you.
Just wanted to say how much a fan I am of Carl Rogers.
Sometimes all a person needs to fix an injured mind is someone who will listen with a gentle ear.
I had nothing but gentle ears throughout my fatherless childhood. I turned out so broken that I had to go into the Marine Corps to fix it. Now I see that I was a natural born conservative masculine and religious person, but had my head nearly turned to mush at every turn by a lack of discipline and intellectual honesty. I’d rather hear the painful truth a hundred times than a polite lie once.
I think you’re misinterpreting Rogers.
His whole thing was about respecting the fact that individuals have their own perspectives and needs. If you’re a conservative masculine and religious person than that’s fine… The role of the humanistic psychologist would have just been to give you a place to discuss this openly if you wanted to.
It’s not a prescriptive approach like other methods in health psychology.
Not everyone wants to be a conservative masculine and religious person… And humanistic psychology is flexible enough for different kinds of people.
I don’t understand why this thread is against humanistic psychology.
The problem is Clark, a lot of psychology today is misinterpreted and put into practice for all the wrong reasons. Psychology as a scientific discipline is the study of the human mind. Many of the theories and branches of psychology are designed to tackle abnormal/unhealthy ‘minds’. The lunatics we are fighting today has taken these theories and practices that were design to help people and use them to destroy them in the name of progress to achieve there goals. To quote Richard Feynman:
“It is that scientific knowledge enables us to do all kinds of things and to make all kinds of things. Of course if we make good things, it is not only to the credit of science; it is also to the credit of the moral choice which led us to good work. Scientific knowledge is an enabling power to do either good or bad—but it does not carry instructions on how to use it. ”
From the article, you can definitely tell the person in charge want that outcome or just didn’t care what the outcome was.
I worked in the academic psychology industry for a number of years. I know how corrupt it is. I myself have published papers with spurious results. Actually, a paper came out this earlier year claiming that over 50% of psychological studies cannot be reproduced…
I’m not defending institutions that peddle psychological gobbly gook. But I think this thread is wrong to criticize men like Carl Rogers and Maslow. Psychology has only been established as a science for around 100 years… It is far younger than practically every other discipline proper. The scientific method is about refining old theories… but things have to start somewhere.
I’m in agreement with you. Rogers and Maslow’s theories were aim to understanding the human mind.They provided a foundation to create therapies in helping people. Feynman’s quote is reminder to anyone that reads ROK, that psychology as scientific discipline is not causing the problems we see today. It is the quacks and charlatans that use it for their own twisted goals.
Indeed. Its actually more about how psychological theories can be used by unscrupulous humans to be interpreted in any way that suits their ends. Otherwise your taking away the responsibility of interpretation from the individual.
I dislike Rogers for philosophical reasons. I am very familiar with the method of “counseling” where the counselor does nothing but reflect the client’s thoughts back at him. Have you seen I Heart Huckabees? Rogers is the Tomlin/Hoffman existential duo- pathetic, full of shit, quacks. Reality is the French nihilist Huppert. I prefer nihilism to deep thoughts with Jack Handy, and so should you, because that’s real life, and pleasant lies are damning and destructive.
This study proves that if the authority changes the rewards and punishments, you will get a different behavior from the community. It also shows that Freudians are degenerate people who want a culture that rewards the debasement of human beings. And that psychoanalysis makes it easier for its practitioners to conceal their intentions, which in this case consisted of replacing the moral authority of Mother Superior with their own immoral authority. As the new authority, the nuns perceived the psychoanalyst to have high status, which made it easier for him to have sex with the nun, which not coincidentally was something he wanted to do. Psychoanalysis is a collection of deceiving ideas. For genuine psychology, read Pavlov, Skinner and Cialdini.
Freud is a Jew
Abraham Maslow too
And for still more, read:
50 Years in the Church of Rome by Charles Chiniquy (late 1800s) http://www.biblebelievers.com/chiniquy/index.html
The Awful Disclosures of Maria Monk (late 1800s) http://www.reformation.org/maria-monk.html
The Testimony of Sister Charlotte (early 1900s) http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/charlot1.htm
A few of us could list more. There were many, many other and older witnesses who/which documented that Roman convent life has ALWAYS been morally debauched (not to mention cruel). The grotesque, child-abusing, child-abducting system didn’t need Freud or any post-Vatican II developments to debauch it. Superficial, temporary tides notwithstanding, Rome never changes at its core.
So says the sectarian that rejects divine authority (the very words of the Lord) and replaces them with his own, hence there is not one but thousands of “churches” that “receive messages from God”. What a good joke.
Every catholic who has grown up in the past half-century has seen the spirit of Vatican 2 as the excuse given any time someone wants to remake the church in their own image, rather than the image of God. It’s almost a cliche now, but I’ve seen what happens when people lack traditions. In my own extended family, women have tried to create their own traditions in family settings. Most people have some need to be linked to a culture or seek God in an identifiable way.
As far as what Vatican 2 actually says, very little doctrine was changed. Changes to the Liturgy made then were probably overdue, since the Tridentine mass dates from the 1500’s, and contains elements no longer relevant to the Church’s situation today. What Catholic liberals went on to do was abuse the “spirit of Vatican 2” to introduce their pet causes. Think of it as the Catholic Church version of what the US Government has been facing over the past 100 years.
After all this, the CC still opposes abortion, divorce, and homosexual marriage as evils, unlike many other Christian denominations. Part of this resistance comes from influences outside North America and Europe, and part comes from the leadership structure of the Church itself.
If I’ve learned one thing in my time as a Catholic, it’s never to trust outside reporting on an issue. The reporter always has an agenda, and almost always gets in wrong for one reason or another. A kind interpretation is they have no idea what they’re talking about. A less kind interpretation is they willfully misrepresent what’s going on in the church.
Talmudic Judaism seems to offer little solution other than capitalisation upon life’s problems. I was gobsmacked when I first read what it said about non-Jews especially after the careful indoctrination of 20th century history by moneyed elites.
Freud plundered an abundance of people conflicted with their drives to sex and violence in a culture where this was discouraged by religious decree, to the point of moral skewer.
Even today, Freud has pole position in historical endeavours to discern major human psychological phenomena. Yet, for scores of subsequent decades, the key phenomena remain obscured by his jargon.
Why?
How many people are aware that Freud’s relative, Bernays, wrote the “seminal” paper on propaganda from the conveniently comfortable isolation of the United States?
Freud’s triumvirate model of superego, ego and Id, similarly inseminated early discourse of the separation of religion from human psychology, much as Cromwell’s backers struck a proto-Marxist cuckwedge between King and God.
Freud’s key insights include – people like to have sex and will be violent, unless constrained. They become anxious, riven by conflict when they can’t do either of these things when they wish it and express this in a categorised manner.
They overcome these issues if they meet the need or through other means, namely humour, transcending the prevailing human orthodoxy and alternatively, abstention from pleasure in religious withdrawal.
These are late industrial era realities of alpha and betatude.
The key insight attributed to Freud and a great one, is that all relationships are internalised into headspace and thence redistributed to group.
Bernays extrapolated to the herd what Freud gleaned from the dyad.
Once you swallow the red pill and see religion as the corporate entity as it really is….you no longer care about it.
They have been loosing money for years and the Catholic church is just now doing something about it. They have been pandering to women all these years and are surprised when they are not getting the money they used to. Now, they are trying to say that God loves gays and lesbians and all that horse shit. All they are trying to do is get into a market niche.
Psychology can help to understand oneself and the others. But it also gives a great manipulative power. No wonder one can find so many Jews amongst psychology, even if there is nothing directly political there.
“a decree to open dialogue with other religions”
Unfortunately not in a bid to increase the knowledge base of Catholics but merely an attempt convert the other religions to Catholicism.
“If a group of hundreds of nuns can be convinced to renounce their vows and become radical lesbians within only a year of exposure”
I doubt most of them “turned” lesbian but where lesbian all along. Celibate orders the world over are renown for homosexuality. I sometimes think they were created specifically to give homosexuals a place to go, live and prosper, without having to get married to the opposite sex. This goes all the way back to ancient times even before Christianity.
Leo_XIIIAccording to legend, exactly 33 years (span of our Lord’s life) to the day prior to the great Miracle of the Sun in Fatima, that is, on October 13, 1884, Pope Leo XIII had a remarkable vision. When the aged Pontiff had finished celebrating Mass in his private Vatican Chapel, attended by a few Cardinals and members of the Vatican staff, he suddenly stopped at the foot of the altar. He stood there for about 10 minutes, as if in a trance, his face ashen white. Then, going immediately from the Chapel to his office, he composed the prayer to St. Michael, with instructions it be said after all Low Masses everywhere. When asked what had happened, he explained that, as he was about to leave the foot of the altar, he suddenly heard voices – two voices, one kind and gentle, the other guttural and harsh. They seemed to come from near the tabernacle. As he listened, he heard the following conversation:
The guttural voice, the voice of Satan in his pride, boasted to Our Lord: “I can destroy your Church.”
The gentle voice of Our Lord: “You can? Then go ahead and do so.”
Satan: “To do so, I need more time and more power.”
Our Lord: “How much time? How much power?”
Satan: “75 to 100 years, and a greater power over those who will give themselves over to my service.”
Our Lord: “You have the time, you will have the power. Do with them what you will.”
With over half the nuns gone, the remaining nuns became radical lesbian activists. The convent soon closed, and remained vacant for years until it announced in 2015 the building will be sold to Katy Perry. LMFAO. The irony is that “I kissed a girl” Katy Perry, herself a reformed Bible camp girl purchased the property. God is a Joker.