We enjoyed listening to you. We do not care about technicals we care about you. I know it was too much for every one, not only you. Other nationalities were killed in the attack not only Americans. In my openion only one gervernment has benefited from all of this "Israel" As well as large position shorts.
i would guess you are the same snide, self-obsessed prick with your patients that you are here. i'm sure you know the dsm backwards and forwards, but wouldn't know the first thing to say to a kid whose parents just died. i hope that your masterful sense of psychology led you to go long on this dog ten points ago. anyone that needs to flaunt their professional credentials on a yahoo board is suffering from a very compolex phenomenon called "insecurity".
thanks imad - i'm a negative, opinionated guy, but always curious about other cultures.
is there ever any conflict in how riba is seen in a corporate context - is the way that most corporations use debt seen as unethical? is investing in one seen as contrary to riba?
First I am non Saudi (palestinian with Jordanian Nationality) but I am living here in Saudi Arabia for the past 12 years. So I am in Saudi Arabia before even "Desert Storm". during the past 10 years in Saudi Arabia-Riyadh , I did not see Any American Solder, I know there are here, but they are in their bases (not "The Base"). May be thats why you do not hear people talking about the presence of Americans in the Gulf.
>Your analogy to Freud being like Newton is also erroneous. Your statement that "Science is an iterative evolving process" is true,
>and especially applicable to Freud, but not in the way you meant it: Freud had no foundation or precedent in developing his
>theories of psychological dynamics and psychic structure. He had nothing of substance to 'iterate' from.
You missed the point (again). I wasn't saying Newton was iterative . . . Newton was a pioneer (like Freud). However, Frued . . . like Newton, is out of date and their teachings are useful in only limited context. Thus, you went on to reinforce my point . . . thanks. Perhaps if you didn't have so much attitude while reading, you'd see that I said the same thing.
>Uh, I hate to confuse you with the facts, but Freud never said any such thing. Nor has any published psychologist or psychiatrist that
>I've ever either read or heard of.
Yeah . . . you are certainly the expert in psychology . . . you couldn't even recognize sarcasm. My point wasn't that penis envy has anything to do with schizophrenia, it was just that penis envy is stupid concept dreamed up by Frued.
>Freud, in the case of penis envy, was referring to a normal phenomenon which he believed female
>children encounter in trying to resolve developmental issues which are universally experienced.
"he believed" . . . what? . . . So *you* don't believe that theory? Are you agreeing with me that this archaic concept is bogus?
>How do I know this? As a clinical psychologist in practice and teaching for 15 years, who wrote a theoretical dissertation
>in re-integration of Kleinian aggression in Object Relations' theoretical models, I've read almost all of the works of the
Ah yes, a psychologist . . . what's the matter, couldn't you get into med school to become a psychiatrist? My view of psychologists is similar to chiropractors . . . they don't cure anything, they just get people into endless treatment. Don't get me wrong, psychology is a fascinating field and has uses. But anyone that claims they understand the brain is a charlatan. It is an awesome complex work of evolution that we are just beginning to understand. Since our understanding is so primitive, psychology is filled with lots of charlatans that *think* they understand things. It is a quarrelsome field with many competing theories . . . and few clear effective therapies.
If I were you, I'd lobby for the ability to allow psychologists perscribe SSRIs. It beats trying to survive in academia.
I usually avoid extended flame wars, but since you continue to display an unusually noxious combination of arrogance and ignorance on the subject of psychology,let me respond to some of your more clueless points:
In repsonding to my objection to your statement, "Freud is generally discrdited", you respond, "Oh really. You think paranoid schizophrenia is caused by penis envy?"
Uh, I hate to confuse you with the facts, but Freud never said any such thing. Nor has any published psychologist or psychiatrist that I've ever either read or heard of. Freud, in the case of penis envy, was referring to a normal phenomenon which he believed female children encounter in trying to resolve developmental issues which are universally experienced. it has nothing to do with schizophrenia or pathology per se. Where'd you come up with that crazy information? Was it transmitted to you brain by Q-ray from Aliens living under the Rio Grande river? If so, I suggest you wrap your head in tin-foil in order to stop such thoughts from reaching your brain. ;-)
Your analogy to Freud being like Newton is also erroneous. Your statement that "Science is an iterative evolving process" is true, and especially applicable to Freud, but not in the way you meant it: Freud had no foundation or precedent in developing his theories of psychological dynamics and psychic structure. He had nothing of substance to 'iterate' from. That's the brilliance of his achievement - he came up with a complete field of science where none existed before. Furthermore, those who have produced evolved 'iterations' of Freudian theory (neo-Freudians such as Anna Freud and Melanie Klein in the 30's, British Object Relation Theorists in the 40's, 50's, and 60's (Fairbairn, Winnicott, Guntrip, and R.D. Lang to some degree), and more recently Self-Psychology all build on Freud's initial brilliant discoveries, and largely modified or elaborated them, rather than supplanting them. Many, if not most, of Freud's basic ideas serve as essential foundation for these more modern theories, rather than being "discredited" or "wrong" as you suggest. If you want to read some intelligent feminist re-thinking of some Freudian concepts, start with books such as Dorothy Dinnerstein's "The Mermaid and the Minotaur".
How do I know this? As a clinical psychologist in practice and teaching for 15 years, who wrote a theoretical dissertation in re-integration of Kleinian aggression in Object Relations' theoretical models, I've read almost all of the works of the above-named authors? And your sources? I think maybe you are watching too much Oprah.
I suggest that you stick to your area of expertise, if you have one. You will only cast more light on the depth of your ignorance otherwise. On the other hand, I don't think you could manage to look more foolish than you already do to those with any substantial knowledge of the field.
One thing is for sure: If you display the same level of knowledge and applied logic to stocks that you have shown in psychology, people can safely, and perhaps wisely, ignore your opinions. Feel free to reply if you like, but this will likely be my last post on the topic, as I have little else to say.
while we are discussing the subject of america and her foreign policy with people of various nations and their relationship with the usa, perhaps you should take pains to explain that texas is not in the usa, and hence you are not speaking from an "american" perspective, but a texan one.
>I thank you but I live in Saudi Arabia.
Really? Well, if you would be so kind as to indulge me, I'd love to hear your opinion on the general consensus in Saudi Arabia. I worry that the U.S. support of King Fahd is becoming counter-productive. Clearly Osama hates the US presence in Saudi Arabia, but what does the general population there feel?
good point. But many of his followers are
recruited because of Israel atrocities
againt Palestinian and Lebanese civilians.
Israel breaks US and international laws
and hides behind the US. US politicians
support Israel because of a few thousands
If a foreign policy is wrong we should be
able to change it. It's not smart to stick
to a wrong foreign policy.
Arab and Muslim have been discriminated in
this country for a long time. And after this
tragedy they have been blamed by a few stupid
Americans. They were one of the first groups
to denounce the acts of terror, they offered
their help in many ways and they established
a fund to help the victims families.