Comments on: Fr. Gregory Jensen: The Moral Limits of Psychology

By: M. Stankovich

M. Stankovich — Tue, 26 May 2015 15:48:10 +0000

My, My. I can't imagine what was contained in my first response here that resulted in it being canned, but... Anyway, Mr. Bradshaw, in it's modern incarnation, psychiatry is not "beneficial in that it encourages introspection and self evaluation as opposed to simply reacting blindly to life." If you are a psychiatrist in the US who is reimbursed by healthcare insurance - commercial or government funded - you are being reimbursed for diagnostic, initial medication provision, and medication management services only. The only psychiatrists I know who are being paid to provide psychotherapy are those who are paid out-of-pocket by their patients. They are older and they are from the days when medical schools actually taught the theories and practice of psychotherapy (meaning that any graduating social worker is generally considerably more skilled and practiced and experienced in the actual modalities of therapy - individual, group, and family - than any psychiatry resident). Psychiatry, with few exceptions, is the business of medicine, not therapy, which leads me to say that, to this day, the specific mechanisms by which common aspirin exerts its analgesic & anti-inflammatory effects are unknown. I am not a pharmacologist, but it is my experience that this a similar fact - generally worded, "it is thought that that the mechanism of action is..." - of most familiar medications. This, for the sake of comparison, would make Pharmacology an equally inexact science. I believe I provided a definition of a "psychologically healthy individual" common to the field of mental health, but Fr. Hans deleted my post. I do not intend to retype my post, but if you leave your email address at my website, I will send it to you. Michael Bauman: There is a wonderful essay by Fr. Florovsky, “Empire and Desert: Antinomies of Christian History" (or Antinomies of Christian History: Empire and Desert, I can't recall) in his Collected Works (I've seen it on Google) where he discusses St. Basil the Great's "Theology of Work." It may be helpful to you.

By: James Bradshaw

James Bradshaw — Sat, 23 May 2015 01:19:35 +0000

Psychiatry is beneficial in that it encourages introspection and self evaluation as opposed to simply reacting blindly to life. Sometimes there are biological imbalances that benefit from medication such as severe depression, Tourettes and social anxiety. As someone who suffered the bizarre affliction of panic attacks at one point, I can attest to how medication in the right dosage and use can allow one to function and live a relatively happy, normal life.

I dont think it’s an exact science though. What constitutes a psychologically healthy individual is difficult to define, and sometimes the treatment may cause more problems than the disease.

By: Michael Bauman

Michael Bauman — Fri, 22 May 2015 15:50:14 +0000

I would also add that the sort of psychology being critiqued here that the combination of such an anti-human approach when combined with computer technology sets the foundation for an unprecedented attack on humanity itself. AI people going back at least 35 years have made the claim that AI machines will be the next dominant life form on the planet. The swallow and wrong anthropology/ontology of modern psychology gives credence to the idea the robots can and should replace we humans.

There does not seem to be any serious consideration of anything even as rudimentary as Asimov’s Three Laws of Robotics to protect humanity:
1.A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
2.A robot must obey orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
3.A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.

Elon Musk, not exactly a Luddite, has recently warned against the dangers of AI

A new book by Martin Ford: Rise of the Robots: Technology and the Threat of a Jobless Future also points out that major changes are neither science fiction nor far off “in the future” but are happening right now.

Oh, and if you want to buy the book, please don’t order on Amazon with its robotic algorithms meant to mimic human behavior and with contributions from money they receive going to such things as promoting homosexual marriage.

I am sure Eighth Day Books would get it for you. It is a truly human book store.

Given the fact that Fortune Magazine and other on-line content providers are using computers to write many of their stories (according to Mr. Ford), I for one am suspicious of the “reviews” on Amazon.

Here is a partial list of the jobs Mr. Ford says are already being significantly impacted by computers:
Attorneys
Middle Mangers in Business
Anything that involves the analysis of data
Many health professions (nursing being the lone exception)
Fast food.

The question I would like to see addressed from an Orthodox perspective is the value and nature of human work. That, it would seem to me, would encompass and go more deeply to the heart of the intersect between economics, psychology, politics and technology.