Posted: Feb 06, 2020 6:40 pm
by Fallible
Thing is I recognise the ways in which my formal training is lacking, one of which is that the entire field is lacking in empirical data to back up its theories. We are floundering around, trying to catch up. However, I do balk at the idea that because there are large gaps, and what we think we know we don’t actually know and is open to being discredited, and frequently is, any auld geezer with a thought falling out his head has to have his latest pet idea greeted with reverence just because it fell out in the vicinity of other people. Just because a field lacks rigour, doesn’t mean there’s none.

Edit: ffs, you consider yourself to be a psychologist?? No one who diagnoses their ex on a whim and tries to diagnose people over an Internet forum via links should be anywhere near such a statement. I’m not on the same fucking planet as such a statement, and I’ve been working in this field for over 10 years. You need a license. Got one of those? You got a doctorate? A Masters? Almost every psychologist’s title is a protected title, did you know that? Are you in the HCPC? What you are is an amateur enthusiast, just like I am with History. I have a high level qualification in it, I still don’t call myself a historian.