danston

So people need protection. OK, from whom or what?

It's common knowledge that: - these "people" like to regulate how their patients' families are run. er.. is that their business? - these "people" are not even that decent, and don't offer much to the world around them. - these people believe it's wrong to be atheistic, yet many younger people are. so wrong for ME and not for others? More of their metaphysical bullshit without scientific backing again?

Depends. Psychologists select which children DESERVE comfort, because only SOME in life deserve to be healthy!!

No. No!! It's based on moralising, and a general sinister plot at hand. Psychologists tend to: - Select who warrants rights per Western norms - Try and push who is "spiritually anointed" without citing any medical and/or scientific evidence for this - Believe themselves to be "spiritually anointed" and expect all others to look up to them/respect them at all times. They also don't get reciprocity in human actions. - Are people without any heart or decency, and tend to use their psychology to bully others (despite widely condemning bullying) - Believe they hold some "authority" to change society into how THEY want it to be Look at it this way. Psychologists tend to be very needy, pushy and self-righteous people. They expect all others to give a shit about them, and don't hold a net positive contribution to the world around them. They actively select who receives good treatment, and expect all others to see the world in their spiritualistic views. Yes, so people who study the world and people cannot conceive of subjectivity....

I don't believe in evil. However, I think he was is he was. no trauma, just a "bad" person.

eh? If psychology is against me, then I am against it. Sorry, but the world operates on a tit for tat basis. Also, it's a fact that psychologists engage in "damnation selection" of children, despite their claims to the contrary. If these "people" do this, then it lends to their practice being evil. They also don't get humanity, they project their opinions as fact. They deny the common rights of society to "some they don't like". this includes: - The right to property - The right not to be assaulted - The right to vote - The right to access state services - The right to human rights They all hate the precepts of modern society, yet claim to live in the modern world and understand how humans are, think, behave and believe. hahaha! LOSERS!!

i'd define it as the science involved in developing means to store, process, send and retrieve digitial information. so if the IETF releases a new (say) Application Layer protocol, or the IEEE approves a new OSI Layer 1 format, then computer scientists had to analyse and test the new formats based on theoretical concepts.

Not. Not even the UK has a unified culture. Take these cities/regions: - Glasgow - Belfast - Yorkshire - Liverpool - Manchester - The Black Country - East Anglia - London - The West Country All are cities/regions in the UK, all speak Standard British English, yet have different cultures. Many have their own dialects. Scouse (per Liverpool) is not spoken that much in London or East Anglia.

It can, but it's not an ethical means to do so. Also, there is little evidence that sweatshops lead to economic enhancement rather than sustenance. India and China are not advancing due to sweatshops, but do to macroeconomic and to some extent social reforms.

The will to do as I please when I please.

I'm new here. my main scientific interest is anthropology, mainly paleoanthropology. i hate psychology though, since it's evil, designed to control, and single out some they "detest" (lol.. the irony of people saying that hatred is unhealthy, yet hating others is grand, eh?)

Depends. I think humans are merely at the top of the scale. It's a spectrum and not absolutes.

I think I may be, but how does a man generally know?

Isn't it simply governments that create this concept?

Isn't it true that psychologists are out to get people "they don't like"? Isn't it also the case that psychologists are merely out to scamp people? And to harass/bully people they deem "weird"? Most psychologists don't care a damn and only seek to treat people whom they deem "worthy". It also is the case they believe they are "anointed". and thus can do as they please lol.. why must others accept their "anointed" status? They also seek to regulate how families are governed, and don't comprehend basic social norms of the societies they live in. Most in the UK (my country) seem to detest the fact that most here are not religious, when it's not their business to detest it. If they hate it, then leave, it's that simple. Look, most psychologists: - Post nonsense studies designed to "regulate" and "control" society. - They actively select and single out children to mock, follow and deride, and then cite how "all children need to be respected since it's good for their health" lol.. this is proof that they're evil. - They base their conclusions on personal whim, and not solid evidence. What's more is that most of these "people" hate modern society. They hate digital technology, and think anti-racism/anti-sexism are bad. and yes, this includes the female and non-white psychologists also, so go figure. They also believe that people are "anointed" by "the Universe" in life positions. Ok, so cite the scientific proof for the existence of fate, kindly? And yes, my poll and basic thread question contradict, so what? most people contradict. it's human. this proves my point about being "anointed" lol.. I personally don't think anything controls me, regardless of any "fate" which may or may not exist (unlike most psychologists, I hold an open mind and accept fate COULD exist,you see I don't mentally live in the 18th century or in medieval feudal society). And yes, somebody may say I am being judgmental. And? they all hate/detest me, so I respond in kind. So yes, have a shitty comprehension of social discourse whilst you're at it.. lol..