Psycho-mumbo-jumbo?

[Andersen]

Is it just me, or do most INTJs find pop psychology-talk useless and boring?

[Tarrick]

Depends. Usually, but then again, usually it's all stereotyped for people who are not us.

[Guido]

pop psychology-talk o.0

examples?

[Cato the Younger]

Though I find Wikipedia to be a horrible source for argument, I do find that it is useful for basic information.

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[Rei]

It's rather pointless... my aversion to it has grown since taking real psychology courses. >:(

[Cato the Younger]

Yeah, I've had problems with it for years. For example, my mom loves Dr. Phil and I find him very annoying. He did this one segment about teenagers texting while driving and got the DUMBEST girl to defend it. The man loves to stack the deck.

[Guido]

Oh man, don't get me started on Dr. Phil. My mom used to watch his show all the time... which I think most INFJs could really relate to. The guy's a nut and can be summed up with this: To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Reality hits some people pretty hard :o

[Rei]

Oh yeah.
My dormmate last year used to watch Dr.Phil all the time. And when I ate lunch I was forced to endure it.
It was so ridiculous. It annoys me so much that he assumes everything. I seriously wanted to bash my head against the wall with every comment he made.

If we were ever on the show, he'd get so owned.

[deicruxified]

Yeah, I've had problems with it for years. *For example, my mom loves Dr. Phil and I find him very annoying. *He did this one segment about teenagers texting while driving and got the DUMBEST girl to defend it. *The man loves to stack the deck.
i think his violating a lot of rules in psych therapy... media exposure could be a factor so the tendency would be people would be forced to change (if ever they will be) out of humiliation... my sister who happens to be a psych student share the same sentiment as well.

[True Rune]

Seems so. That stuff seems rather dull to me. I doubt we're the only type that doesn't buy this stuff. Though I really enjoy psychology class.

[PortInStorm]

It's like the difference between "red sky in morning ...." and a meterologist (Dopplar anyone?) Sure, pop psychology can sometimes be on target in a vague sort of way, but real psychology is so incredibly broad, scientific (though 'scientific' can be defined in, and achieved via, various methods as well), and precise. It's way more than Freud, and they study the mind and all that proceeds from it in the same way people study the weather. Do we think it's the panacea of mankind? No. Do we think it's as useful? Yes.

[PHS Philip]

Pop psychology is the chiropractic of psychology. No, forget that. Chiropractic at least produces the beneficial effects of a massage. Pop psychology is the homeopathy of psychology.

[Seppuku Savant]

Depends on what specifically. Mostly, yes. Useless.

[Jakalwarrior]

Anytime somone believes or tries to spread BS it hurts me lol. Pop psych falls into that category and since I have a piddly bachelors in psych I know just enough to recognize it as BS.

[ScurvyRose]

With DR Phil as one of pop psych's top teachers what is there really to talk about? Drives me nuts!

[eli]

I bought one psycho-pop book out of curiosity, "The Secrets of Happy People". Some of it was pretty common sense stuff, like eat fruits, exercise and eat right.

Then there was less run of the mill advice, like believe in a religion because studies prove that those who are believers versus atheists are happier in life.
I happen to be an atheist because I consider my beliefs to be the closest thing to the truth, not because it will make me happier. I would expect real believers to also believe in God, because they consider it the truth, not because it will make them a more happy productive member of society.

It made me think that pop-psychology aims to simply sugar coat life, without considering the broader spectre of human experience.

[SShack]

I bought one psycho-pop book out of curiosity, "The Secrets of Happy People". Some of it was pretty common sense stuff, like eat fruits, exercise and eat right.

Then there was less run of the mill advice, like believe in a religion because studies prove that those who are believers versus atheists are happier in life.
I happen to be an atheist because I consider my beliefs to be the closest thing to the truth, not because it will make me happier. I would expect real believers to also believe in God, because they consider it the truth, not because it will make them a more happy productive member of society.

It made me think that pop-psychology aims to simply sugar coat life, without considering the broader spectre of human experience.

That's amusing logic: "People who believe X say they're happier, so therefore you should believe X too and you will be happier!" Like you can just suddenly decide to believe in things that you didn't believe in before.

[bricklayer]

I prefer real psychology that's deep and true.

[zibber]

Though I find Wikipedia to be a horrible source for argument, I do find that it is useful for basic information.

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

LOL.. from the page:

# urban legends such as "Psychologist B. F. Skinner raised his own daughter in a 'Skinner box' "[4]

:)

[eli]

That's amusing logic: "People who believe X say they're happier, so therefore you should believe X too and you will be happier!" Like you can just suddenly decide to believe in things that you didn't believe in before.

Exactly. It felt like they were trying to make their readers totally change who they are, rather than give them tips on how to be happier with who they currently are and help them change what they don't like about themselves.
"You are type A, but studies show that type B has more fun, so just become type B already."
Conformism in the name of individual happiness. Does anybody else feel that North American society is in a mad quest for happiness, rather than truth, justice or equality (you know all those things that would existence more meaningful)?

[Blacklustre King]

Yes, the answer is an emphatic yes.

[Indy]

That's amusing logic: "People who believe X say they're happier, so therefore you should believe X too and you will be happier!" Like you can just suddenly decide to believe in things that you didn't believe in before.

Yeah, it doesn't make sense to change your beliefs for that reason.

Apparently, Francis Bacon was to have said that since the concept of God is indeterminable (you can't be prove he exists, but you can't prove he doesn't), you do have a choice of what you would have liked to be true. Believing can be considered a 'better', let's say 'utilitarian', choice based on these two options.

As an atheist myself, this argument has some value when you start agressively convincing people, a la Richard Dawkins, about the 'idiocy' of religion. You are then easily acting in an un-utilitarian fashion. Why try to take people's beliefs away, if they are living their lives happily?

This wouldn't hold when they are trying to convert others, have a strong political agenda like many evangelicals or otherwise act intolerant to others. Then there is more than enough reason to engage in debates about the fallacies of the bible, etc.

Personally, I'm happier as an atheist than a Christian, even though I enjoyed my Catholic upbringing. I do not envy the (not widely held) believe in purgatory, or Hell for that matter, and a God that is constantly watching over my shoulder.

But for most folks it is apparently a happier idea to go to Heaven, have relatives looking down at them, to have a savior that can help them and that they feel protected and loved by God. Those are some great reasons for people to feel reluctant to give up religion.

I noticed that when I'm talking to Christians or Muslims, I am reluctant to share my own (atheist) arguments that I consider highly convincing. I don't want to destroy any precious bubbles, since nobody benefits from that. A very un-INTJ characteristic perhaps. Better to let people be mistaken and content, then to convince people of the truth and have them feel miserable.

[Julien]

Women love pop psychology.

Magazines, shows, books...etc.

[Elfrun]

Wow, this seems rather one sided so far, well I hadn't heard the term before but from clicking on the link I'd say it's something I'm open to, I know there are some knobjockeys out there who believe their answer will work for everyone or simply want to make money but the name Wayne Dyer jumped out as someone who (from what I've heard/read) I can see merits in for me. I think my upbringing has influenced this but regardless this INTwhatever disagrees with the (very old) OP.

[Jughead]

Women love pop psychology.

Magazines, shows, books...etc.

Stereotype much?

Pop psychology is fun to make fun of!

[Shaz]

Oh man, don't get me started on Dr. Phil. My mom used to watch his show all the time... which I think most INFJs could really relate to. The guy's a nut and can be summed up with this: To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Reality hits some people pretty hard :o

I don't know who this dr. Phil is, but from what you guys say I don't think I woud relate to him (as an INFJ). I used to find pop psychology somewhat attractive as a teenager, I would, say, buy a psychology magazine because something seemed interesting in the context of my life, but I would always be disappointed : what they would say would be either obvious, too general, or too much like your happiness example. So I stopped reading them because they would get on my nerves.

There are probably a few exceptions... I am sure some self-help books can be useful if handled properly. I read a book about procrastination which helped me understand some things, because I was able to take it to my own context. So I don't know. What is the border between pop psychology and serious psychology though? Couldn't books like Please understand me be counted as pop psychology?

I'm not familiar with the term so I wonder. We don't really have tv shows or radio talks about that sort of things in France, to my knowledge. At least no popular ones. We do have a lot of self-help books though, a lot of them translated from English.

[NephilimAzrael]

As a psychologist, I find it amusing. It is much like watching a young niece or nephew playing a specialist eg. Doctor. But as long as it is out there it draws peoples attention.
In fact there is a probability that a few people in here due to the pop psychology of personality testing, but took an interest in the theories afterward.