Comments for Psyc in Literature: The Blog

Comment on Media Analysis #4-Charlie Brown by misterkurtz

misterkurtz — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 14:31:23 +0000

Good choice. “Peanuts” has been the subject of lots of debate. The conventional wisdom is that Schulz legitimized childhood pain and made the cruelties of life visible. Bullying, isolation, and depression weren’t popular subjects for literature about children until he came along. Is that stigmatizing? Or sensitive? I’ve often wondered how Lucy is perceived by practicing psychologists; that would be an interesting research project.

Comment on Media Analysis #3-Van Gogh by misterkurtz

misterkurtz — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 14:28:31 +0000

Did you write that one? Try slipping a reference to Gedde Lee in there next time. Seriously, you made some good points. One misunderstanding: ’stigma’ is used exclusively to describe the attaching of shame or negativity. There’s no such thing as a ‘good’ stigma. What I think you’re getting at, though, is the oversimplification of mental illness, the caricaturing of a serious problem as something that’s somehow enobling. Call it a romanticization of mental illness; the portrait of the artist as a psychotic young man. That, in its own way, can be as damaging as a true stigma, but that’s a separate topic.

Comment on Media Analysis #2: Stranger than Fiction by misterkurtz

misterkurtz — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 14:24:04 +0000

You like that movie, don’t you? I’m going to have to watch it again since I confess I slept through parts of it–I saw it late at night. Perhaps a film that makes people less trusting of their psychologists is stigmatizing in its own way. It labels therapy as useless at best, dangerously misdirected at worst. Let’s face it: hearing voices narrating your life? Occam’s Razor says the most likely explanation is mental illness. An author controlling your existence is pretty far down on the list.

Comment on Media Analysis #1: the away message by misterkurtz

misterkurtz — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 14:21:42 +0000

It is funny, but might also be construed as offensive for its caricatured portrayals. But what about the interesting reinforcement for the ‘paranoid schizophrenic.’ You’re not paranoid if they really are out to get you, right?

Comment on I’ll bet you’ll yawn when you read this by misterkurtz

misterkurtz — Tue, 06 May 2008 14:30:12 +0000

The jury’s out on empathy I think. I’m not sure it’s caused by conditioning although some evidence suggests that a person doesn’t develop it in isolation. The research on the communal yawn is spotty, too. But I don’t see how conditioning accounts for it.

Comment on I’ll bet you’ll yawn when you read this by For Prez '24

For Prez '24 — Wed, 23 Apr 2008 00:55:19 +0000

So perhaps empathy is conditioning as well?

http://www.QuestioCunctus.com

Comment on Rationalization by misterkurtz

misterkurtz — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 13:43:25 +0000

I call that the ‘pilot fish’ theory, but perhaps a better metaphor is a goat in a minefield. You hope he will trip the trap before you do. Careful though; if he’s in the center and you’re zooming up the wide open left lane, you might be a more tempting target. Better to drive the posted speed limit. Anyway, as Seinfeld demonstrated, ‘nothing’ is really something. Notice how you’re rationalizing your perceived inability to write a good tenth post, and trying to convince yourself that you don’t care about the result! You shouldn’t worry; you have really done some interesting stuff with this assignment.

Comment on Paul’s Case and Catcher in the Rye by misterkurtz

misterkurtz — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 13:38:02 +0000

Remember last year, with Huck, when we talked about the ‘outsider-narrator?’ Holden, Huck and Paul are all in the same family; disaffected adolescents who are largely uninvested in the values and attitudes of the culture that spawned them. Just like you can’t see the forest through the trees, or think clearly about the game while playing it (Take that!), it’s hard for an insider to look critically at society and its values. What distinguishes Holden from Paul? Charisma, for one thing. A real yearning for a human connection, for another. Even the people Paul seems close to, or drawn to, are means to the end for him.

Comment on A Brief Biography of Alfred Adler, Volume 2 by misterkurtz

misterkurtz — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 13:34:48 +0000

In Armstrong’s first autobiography, It’s Not About The Bike, he writes about being raised by a single mother after his parents divorced. I don’t even think he knew his biological father very well, if at all. Given all that, his continued striving for superiority is no mystery.

Comment on A hoax most cruel by misterkurtz

misterkurtz — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 17:54:03 +0000

You didn’t see that 20/20 special online anywhere, did you? I was looking for news video about this incident but couldn’t find any. Anyway, what about this idea of ‘false power’ vs. ‘real power’? Is there any difference? In other words, does the sense that someone has power mean he actually does have it? Is power given or taken? Those are esoteric and abstract concerns, but a more concrete one is the role that our upbringing and cultural influences may play in making people susceptible to this kind of manipulation. I think you’re close to the mark in your prediction. Have you read Eric Schlosser’s Fast Food Nation? He reveals how McDonalds is essentially treating its line workers are interchangeable parts of a machine; the whole process is designed to be as simple and linear as possible, and it relies largely on unquestioned following of the procedures. A bad model for an informed citizenry!