@Historylover wrote:
@Gwynn, I think Aristotle was into 'psychology' way back when. It's not a new science, to my understanding. It's just been used as a tool of control more recently, while passing itself off as a science–please excuse my cynicism.
@Historylover, psychology - even when it hasn't formally been named as such - has been around since time immemorial. There have always been people searching for ways to coerce the masses into obeying their will, and using clever mind games to do so.
You only need to look at two of the major tactics still used by modern therapists to manipulate their patients; accusing them of being cowards if they don't do what the therapist wants, and accusing them of being selfish if they don't do what the therapist wants. That's essentially the core essence of how we manipulate the population into abstaining from suicide. Because nobody wants to be branded a coward and nobody wants to branded as a selfish pig.
Those name-calling tactics have been employed to great success since ancient times. How many poor young fools have rushed into a senseless war they never understood, because their king and country would think them a dirty coward if they refused to take up arms?
And it exists across all cultures. Take many asian cultures, for example, who were/are deathly afraid of bringing "dishonor" upon their families or lords if they fail to meet up to some communal expectation for them - often in battle. Many of whom would even commit suicide to negate this dishonor. How easy must it have been for a shrewd leader to manipulate such people, when all they would need to do is accuse a resistant individual of cowardace or dishonorable conduct when they hesitated to obey?
Or take many of the polynesian cultures, where it is expected for you to get a body tattoo. and if you refuse (because the procedure is agonizingly painful), you are branded a coward and your entire family becomes the lowest of social outcasts as a result.
We don't call that "psychology" in the same sense as what our "professional" western therapists practice. But the differances are superficial; at their core, they are the same thing. Clever leaders mind-gaming naieve people into dancing to their tune.
@Gwynn wrote:
Science and Enlightenment ideals are a white, European, thing, though.
It may not be specifically Christian in its origins, but psychology was invented by white people, for white people, and it was used as a tool of colonisation.
I'm still not seeing where psychology is more of a 'new age' thing, as psychology, and its use as a tool of colonisation, have existed long before the New Age of the 1970s.
I don't know that people would have necessarily risen up against the psychiatrists if they knew what it does and how it works, though - mental illness creates scapegoats, and society loves us a scapegoat.
Well, I was thinking more in terms of therapy as we experiance it here and now. Particularly in terms of how we've transitioned into this culture where "everybody has a therapist now", whereas in earlier times, (as a general rule) only the most incomprehensable stark-raving mad people would've been sent to a therapist. Yes, I know there are plenty of examples of sane politically defiant people, homosexuals, and opinionated women who were put away simply because they refused to bow to oppressive social norms. But realistically, I can't believe the mental health system of so long ago had the staff numbers to persecute and exploit sane people to the extent they do today. I just yellow-paged "therapist" for my town, and there are 8 results for my sleepy little suburb alone, not even counting the dozens of results in our close neighbor suburbs! There is no way my town would've had that many mental health therapists 50 years ago, because the definition of "mental health problem" was nowhere near as broad as what it is today! Therapists were a (comparitively) small tribe because their victim pool was so sparse.
But when you get to circa the 1980s, suddenly everybody has a mental health problem and needs expert help! All the kids need to be on meds for their ADHD!
I think about where I would be if I'd reached maturity in the 1950s or even 60s, and first of all I probably wouldn't have even had my problems to begin with. But even if I had suffered a similar fate, there is no way that anyone would've perceived it as a problem that warranted a therapist! Because I'm generally not incoherant to talk to, and I don't go running up and down main street naked singing praises to Beelzebub. And way back when, that's pretty much the benchmark you needed to reach for people to believe you needed to be sent off to a therapist.
Back then, if you had a shit life, people who felt motivated to help you would focus on fixing that shit life. Now, they pressure you in to seeing a therapist so you can talk ad nauseum about having a shit life, and be pressured into "coping" or "accepting" your shit life.
Now yeah, I know that a lot of groups in those times who had shit lives wouldn't have had anyone who had any interest in helping them. But at least the masses who didn't want to help them were open and honest about it, you know? At least we all knew where the masses stood, and even the masses themselves knew what their position was.
These days, the masses are all conned into believing that their "helping" the misfortunate by paying for them to receive therapy; completely masking the fact that their shit lives remain shit lives and that nothing meaningful is changing
Frankly, I prefer the older style where at least people were honest about their intention to neglect you. We all knew where we stood, and there was no false hope cruelly dangled in front of the misfortunate.
