37 definitions by Shadow Creator
A profession that is seemingly obsessed with enforcing the status quo. Genuine emotional understanding, empathy, and deep interactions have been replaced by some supposedly 'objective science'; a mere attempt to ignore the talent that some have with relating to others and medicalize emotions. Whether a person has a 'disorder' or 'disease' is not determined by whether someone has a visible ailment that has a specific biological cause, but by a system of observed behaviors that can wildly vary from psychiatrist to psychiatrist.
Many people trust the field of psychiatry simply because it involves 'doctors'. People in modern society have been taught to believe anything that the man in the white lab coat says, regardless of whether he or she is actually a doctor.
Psychiatry is also involved in 'prescribing' huge quantities of often dangerous drugs; though for some they do blunt or alleviate symptoms (about as good as alcohol), many experience 'positive effects' only in the vein of placebo, or experience only negative effects. This, however, does not mean that the drugs actually CURE anything. Psychiatric drugs are supposed to work by 'building up in your bloodstream', which is a way to convince 'patients' that they are receiving legitimate treatment, and is nothing short of a complete lie. Most of this happens because of pharmaceutical company involvement. Most 'research' is horribly skewed to promote the companies' drugs, as the variables are EXTREMELY subjective, i.e. a 'rating' scale for 'depression'.
All in all, most psychiatrists are not 'evil', just controlled by a few money obsessed individuals who would rather enforce the status quo; hence blind leading the blind. Some psychiatrists do desire to change the field, but have a hard time getting through the system if they don't shut up and try to think for themselves. Many 'professionals' in the field are arrogant because they have been taught to believe that they can understand others well by essentially wasting time learning utter nonsense in 'university'. There has never been proof of mental disorders originating from 'biochemical factors' or any 'genetic chemical imbalance', but psychiatry dangerously takes the technical reality that biochemical/genetic factors are involved in everything in our lives and takes the huge logical leap to the idea that we end up miserable BECAUSE something goes 'wrong' in the brain. The reality is the opposite. The brain adjusts to negative circumstances just as it does to positive, and a change of circumstances coupled with emotional healing will always be more effective than any kind of psychiatry/placebo effect. People just don't have the patience, and those at the top are not willing to admit that the cause of all this suffering is a poor status quo combined with rigid enforcement of such 'norms', and materialism gone rampant.
Critics of psychiatry are sometimes intelligent, but sometimes include idiots like Tom Cruise. Avoid them at all costs. Unfortunately, people like him have given anti-psychiatry a bad name, even if his basic premise may have some merit.
Many people trust the field of psychiatry simply because it involves 'doctors'. People in modern society have been taught to believe anything that the man in the white lab coat says, regardless of whether he or she is actually a doctor.
Psychiatry is also involved in 'prescribing' huge quantities of often dangerous drugs; though for some they do blunt or alleviate symptoms (about as good as alcohol), many experience 'positive effects' only in the vein of placebo, or experience only negative effects. This, however, does not mean that the drugs actually CURE anything. Psychiatric drugs are supposed to work by 'building up in your bloodstream', which is a way to convince 'patients' that they are receiving legitimate treatment, and is nothing short of a complete lie. Most of this happens because of pharmaceutical company involvement. Most 'research' is horribly skewed to promote the companies' drugs, as the variables are EXTREMELY subjective, i.e. a 'rating' scale for 'depression'.
All in all, most psychiatrists are not 'evil', just controlled by a few money obsessed individuals who would rather enforce the status quo; hence blind leading the blind. Some psychiatrists do desire to change the field, but have a hard time getting through the system if they don't shut up and try to think for themselves. Many 'professionals' in the field are arrogant because they have been taught to believe that they can understand others well by essentially wasting time learning utter nonsense in 'university'. There has never been proof of mental disorders originating from 'biochemical factors' or any 'genetic chemical imbalance', but psychiatry dangerously takes the technical reality that biochemical/genetic factors are involved in everything in our lives and takes the huge logical leap to the idea that we end up miserable BECAUSE something goes 'wrong' in the brain. The reality is the opposite. The brain adjusts to negative circumstances just as it does to positive, and a change of circumstances coupled with emotional healing will always be more effective than any kind of psychiatry/placebo effect. People just don't have the patience, and those at the top are not willing to admit that the cause of all this suffering is a poor status quo combined with rigid enforcement of such 'norms', and materialism gone rampant.
Critics of psychiatry are sometimes intelligent, but sometimes include idiots like Tom Cruise. Avoid them at all costs. Unfortunately, people like him have given anti-psychiatry a bad name, even if his basic premise may have some merit.
Indeed, I HAVE had a 'major mental disorder', and the 'medications' me on did nothing but mess my life up worse. With a change of attitude (which demonstrates the reality that a person in extreme distress can change if they are given even a bit of hope), I pulled myself out of extreme, chronic depression that most psychiatrists would have insisted was a 'chemical imbalance'. Healing from emotional stress is a long and arduous process which requires relation and collaboration with emotionally intelligent and wise individuals, not popping pills. Psychiatry is little more than an attempt to make money which exploits others' arrogance.
by Shadow Creator August 31, 2007
Oppositional Defiant Disorder: Surprisingly, it's real. A fake ass 'disorder' pulled out of the asses of a small collective of psychiatrists working for pharma companies in order to maximize revenue. Of course, there is no 'authoritarian disorder', because the parents are the ones paying. Despite the seemingly 'funny' aspect of it, this is actually considered a real disorder by many psychiatrists, a scary happening and a looming indicator of what may come.
OMG, he has ODD, force drug him, it can't have anything to do with our ridiculously excessive punishments and restrictions!
by Shadow Creator October 4, 2007
The same exact thing as depression, but usually more severe. Fluffed up with the world 'clinical' to make the problem seem medical.
depressed person: im miserable
psychiatrist: oh no no no you have clinical depression
depressed person: fuck you who cares about your technicalities
psychiatrist: theres a totally different brain structure
depressed person: no there isnt you just made that up
psychiatrist: um...i dunno
psychiatrist: oh no no no you have clinical depression
depressed person: fuck you who cares about your technicalities
psychiatrist: theres a totally different brain structure
depressed person: no there isnt you just made that up
psychiatrist: um...i dunno
by Shadow Creator October 11, 2007
A class of drug (Selective Serotonin Reputake Inhibitor) designed to 'treat' depression, though there is no real evidence that these drugs work beyond temporary stimulation, numbing, placebo effect, or a combination of such. Remember, the 'treatment' of mental illness is highly subjective and is not well understood, making it an easy gray area to screw around with for profit. The 'clinical results' have been fudged by the pharmaceutical companies (who test the drugs themselves) and the FDA, and what little reliable information left obfuscated by nondescript language and misrepresentation. There are many dangerous side effects which have been reported, and are also underplayed purposely to boost sales. In reality, we understand very little about the nature of Serotonin and the brain, so giving SSRI's to 'depressed' patients is simply a stab in the dark to avoid dealing with real issues at hand.
Depressed? It can't be because you feel helpless in a world where the only real choices available to work for a dispassionate corporation or suffer on the street. It can't be because you never felt connected to anyone. It can't be because you were abused at home! No! It's biological! I swear! I'm a real scientist, and I'm just pulling shit out of my ass, but my white lab coat and nondescript brain scan means I'm right! Seriously! Here, take these potentially dangerous and useless drugs! They're called SSRI's! And you really need to want it to help, because that's the only way it will! Wait it's just a placebo effect, but don't tell anyone, and if you do I'll give you more drugs to help treat your 'problems with authority'.
by Shadow Creator October 4, 2007
A usually normal person sometimes given too much power. While police are definitely a necessity in any civilized society (in at least one form or another), in our 'nanny state' nation cops are known for giving people tickets for going too fast, commonly when there's no one in danger, busting up teenage parties, and arresting people for smoking marijuana who are not infringing on the rights of others. They have also been used as an excuse for gun control, except that in reality you need to be able to defend yourself and not rely on someone else.
Many people hate cops because of the 'pig' stereotype. There certainly are many who fit this; pushy, angry, forceful, et cetera. While it is important to be able to keep track of someone, it's not right to resort to extreme measures for bizarre reasons of 'safety' when there is no direct threat present. Also, as described before, many people hate cops because they frequently waste peoples' time with bureaucratic nonsense instead of truly protecting the people from dangerous criminals. However, this is more related to bad laws and flaws in a greedy and shortsighted system than the officers themselves.
Many people hate cops because of the 'pig' stereotype. There certainly are many who fit this; pushy, angry, forceful, et cetera. While it is important to be able to keep track of someone, it's not right to resort to extreme measures for bizarre reasons of 'safety' when there is no direct threat present. Also, as described before, many people hate cops because they frequently waste peoples' time with bureaucratic nonsense instead of truly protecting the people from dangerous criminals. However, this is more related to bad laws and flaws in a greedy and shortsighted system than the officers themselves.
Ex. 1: The police had a typical day; they gave five hundred tickets to irritated motorists, and arrested some kids for underage drinking at a party. (common)
Ex. 2: Wow, that police officer really saved our life! It really seemed as though that guy was going to kill us! (rare)
by Shadow Creator February 15, 2008
1. Usually, a self claimed internet residing 'know it all' who claims to have the knowledge to flop what he/she perceives as a 'conspiracy theory' on its head. This is often a means for showing off. The complete opposite of a hardcore conspiracy theorist, debunkers usually have little common sense, little or no ability to connect the dots, no respect for common sense and call everything that that is outside their narrow a conspiracy theory. Since they profess to rely on hard evidence so much, this often seeps out of the domain of 'hard evidence', and they begin to fabricate so called 'truths' based primarily on jumping to conclusions and ad hominem attacks. Their favorite tactic is to try to 'get something out of the way' by attempting to embarrass their opponent and call it a done deal.
2. The other type of debunker consists of those who are anti-establishment and attempt to expose mainstream fraud and nonsense for what it is using logic, anecdotal evidence, and supplemental facts and figures. They are commonly insulted with the term 'conspiracy theorist' by those who wish to tarnish their reputations. Although still fallible, anti-establishment 'debunkers' commonly have less of an emotional stake in their arguments, as they have seen the light far more than their naive counterparts. Some do, however, take this too far and become truly raving lunatics.
2. The other type of debunker consists of those who are anti-establishment and attempt to expose mainstream fraud and nonsense for what it is using logic, anecdotal evidence, and supplemental facts and figures. They are commonly insulted with the term 'conspiracy theorist' by those who wish to tarnish their reputations. Although still fallible, anti-establishment 'debunkers' commonly have less of an emotional stake in their arguments, as they have seen the light far more than their naive counterparts. Some do, however, take this too far and become truly raving lunatics.
As Joseph explained why psychiatry is not hard science, the debunker yelled "STOP WITH THE CONSPIRACY THEORIES ABOUT BIG PHARMA". However, it's not a conspiracy theory that most funding for psychiatric studies comes from big pharma, that they fund the ads in medical journals profusely, that they conduct their own studies on the drugs they push, that they have a much larger budget (and therefore much larger influence) than the FDA, that they fund APA conventions, and that it is not hard to skew data if you have so much power and are working in a poorly understood area.
by Shadow Creator November 22, 2007
A bunch of nonsense fabricated by simpletons in an attempt to objectify a complex and subjective attribute known as intelligence. This measures the ability to perform simple mental tasks, which can be augmented by training and practice. IQ tests take no note of intuition and creativity, nor have any bearing on true intelligence. They have some relation to job success because only this simple minded interpretation is needed for repetitive and obedient tasks.
I have scored well over 140 on recognized IQ tests scored by 'certified psychologists' while half asleep, but don't give a shit. A truly intelligent person does not brag, but rather teaches, and realizes that a 'high IQ' means precisely dick, just as well as many other qualifications in modern society such as degrees, etc. Many feel intimidated by the real scope of intelligence thus they try to tame it and make it comprehensible on a 'normal' level rather than to truly develop it within themselves and increase the breadth of their perspective.
by Shadow Creator August 15, 2007