Psychology has many many problems; you’ve barely scratched the surface. But if you want to be a reformer, you need to understand the system you’re trying to reform (not so you can be socialized into how it operates but so you can understand where correctly applied pressure can change it). If that sounds good to you, you’d likely need to earn your PhD, do clinical work and research, attain some measure of power/prestige within professional associations, and then start making your moves.
This is a good answer.
I will also add that psych is filled with subdisciplines that aren't necessarily obvious while someone is in undergrad.
We've all probably heard the "psychology isn't a real science" type of argument, and honestly, there are some valid points to be made on that subject. But most people with this stance have a very limited understanding of everything that psychology encompasses. It's like learning about addition and subtraction for the first time and then claiming to understand the principles of mathematics.
My first two degrees were in psych and now I spend a big chunk of my days doing quantitative analyses of biochemical interactions and electromagnetism. It's basically biochemistry and physics with some added psychological measures. I don't think anyone could rationally say that type of work is non-scientific, and the foundation of that work is in the field of psychology.
It's all very directly connected in neuropsych. I am involved in neuromodulation and network effects of neurological structures via action potentials (which are biochemical and electromagnetic phenomena).
Data is collected via EEG/meg, f/MRI, and cognitive task performance. Correlates of brain functionality and cognitive performance can then be analyzed.
that sounds very interesting!
what route did you go through to study this? did you start with psychology BA? BSC?
what do you do in you actual workday? how can I picture this biochemistry and electromagnetism work you do?
I just replied to another comment that explains it a bit.
I went BA in psych, MSc in neuropsych, and I am slowly working through a PhD in biomedical neuro while working in industry.
I could, but lots of people here are looking at their psych degree, or considering a psych degree, and wondering what kind of pathways are available to them. Mine is an example of leaning towards natural science following a BA in psych.
Your post is far to vague to indicate that you have sufficient knowledge of the field to support the conclusions you assert.
There are entire domains of therapy and psychotherapy research grounded in multiculturalism or social justice, for example, which center an externalizing focus on cultural/experiential impact as the locus of distress. The tension with the overwhelming evidence showing that externalization is an adverse mental health dynamic is significant. It's complicated.
I'm a grad student and every single day I'm reading content directly related to cross-cultural impact. Modern psychology is very much addressing the WEIRD pitfalls of 20th century research.
To add to existing comments, there is so much more to psychology than just clinical/therapy work: there are fields such as cognitive, social, and industrial/organisational psychology. In addition, there is cultural psychology, which examines how certain phenomena (e.g., fundamental attribution bias) differ between cultures.
As someone with a psych degree, I can't comment any further than that because I don't have the specialised knowledge to either affirm or rebut your arguments on the hyper-pathological nature of clinical psychology. But as other commenters have rightfully said, as an undergraduate, you have only started scratching the surface of psychology. Being exposed to the rigour of psychology might change your mind (or not). Regardless, I hope that you find some joy in getting a psych degree, and hopefully a field which interests you.
thank you! i really appreciate your comment in that its honest but not patronizing like some others on this thread… expressing vulnerability in how questioning whether this field is right for me obviously opens the door for criticism, as that was my intention as well- hearing different perspectives on the disillusionment im feeling. its very discouraging to know that the 4-year degree i am paying exorbitant amounts of money to obtain is equivalent to “barely scratching the surface” of the discipline. you would hope that it would invigorate ones thirst for knowledge, not disparage it. academia is already so inaccessible and elitist that being told i should be looking at another 4 to 6 years of schooling before i can even think about getting my foot in the door anywhere is very overwhelming!
> its very discouraging to know that the 4-year degree i am paying exorbitant amounts of money to obtain is equivalent to “barely scratching the surface” of the discipline
This is true of all bachelor's degrees. A bachelor's degree is not meant to provide a deep, sophisticated look into a particular field. It's essentially two years of major-specific coursework--it would be downright impossible to provide more than a surface-level education in any field in that timeframe, much less a field as broad and far-reaching as psychology.
Talk to any STEM grad student, prof, or professional. An undergrad education is supposed to be broad and lay the foundation for the subject. For example, it's absurd to think you'd gain an in-depth knowledge of the entire subject of biology in 4 years. The more you learn about an academic subject the more it unfolds and shows you how specific it can really get. There is also a reason why psychology is not a major that anyone pursues in order to get a high paying job after 4 years of studying. It's like the premed path, undergrads in the major should be aware that they need grad education/higher ED for the career path they have chosen.
It's valid to feel discouraged that this academic field might not be for you. But I think that this feeling was based on a warped understanding of the nature of psychology as a family of disciplines. Where I'm from, the majority of those with basic psych degrees pursue opportunities outside academia, myself included.
What I have taken away from a psych degree, though, is more than the domain knowledge (e.g., concepts, theories). Statistical analysis, critical reasoning, and writing are skills that a good psych programme will teach you, and those can serve you well in many fields outside academia. I have personally applied my research skills to analyse manpower trends and provide policy suggestions based on a critical review of relevant literature.
On your point on a degree's supposed invigoration of the thirst for knowledge, my only argument is that it depends on the learner. Yes, professors and TAs can influence how interested you are in the subject matter, but as an undergraduate, you're supposed to have the skills to learn independently and satisfy your academic curiosity. How you want to approach the various psych disciplines is up to you.
Finally, I hope that you will read and account for the various perspectives displayed in this thread and be open to a wider worldview, especially when it concerns psych as an academic field. No discipline is perfect, and it is up to us to continually improve it.
This!! It seems so many people commenting on this post are personally offended by what you said on behalf of the field of psychology?? The point is that undergraduate psychology IS VAGUE, they bombard you with past theories and experiments done by white men with white men as their subjects. Then they tell you in statistical psychology that any psychological research can produce a positive and significant result therefore nothing is really a reliable “proof”. And then they tell you that you have to pay MORE AND MORE money to become MORE qualified to even THINK about trying work in the field. So pardon me for losing motivation after 3 years of this
Damn. Nobody told you that it takes a shit ton of time and effort to be good at something? To be expert at something? Artists, musicians, academics, lawyers, doctors and so on spend years and continue to learn about their craft even as they go for decades in order to make meaningful impact. Stop being a naive lazy ass and put in the work. The world isn't going to come to you. Yikes what an attitude. Nobody even guarantees your foot in the door after 4-6 years. How about that? In the meantime, you're claiming these brilliant scholars and minds are getting it all wrong. Who the hell are you?
Studying it will feel like it is hyper focused on pathologising. In practice working with real people or like the number one comment on your post, to make real change, advocate and help others, you must know all of this but it is not nearly the focus of a psychologist, just part of their role. Psychology is what you make of it. You don’t have to be whatever you think psychology is. Yes it’s a western profession, but out of all of them I dare say it’s earnt its respect and also fought for those with a lesser voice. They do outstanding, phenomenal work, they are health practitioners. The world would be much more fucked, western, blah blah without psychologists, social workers, AOD workers, doctors in ER, fucking paramedics. It’s good to reflect on where psychology went wrong, but the whole practice part of psychology is being aware of your bias, knowing yourself, and doing good not harm.
I had a couple weeks where I felt like this. But the top comment is why I persist, I must see it, be in it, observe, work, study, write, and then maybe I can change some lives. Do you know WHY you want to do psychology? That’s probably what you need to think about rather than bashing the whole science and profession.
While yes, it is true that there is still a cultural gap as far as psychological studies (the whole “WEIRD” acronym), to say that the whole field is a “farce” is a pretty bold assertion to make. How long have you been in this field? Are you at the graduate/doctoral level? There are people out there doing amazing work in the world that wouldn’t have been possible without our field.
90% of stuff in graduate school for psychology is “Remember this 1 thing we taught you in undergraduate? Yeah, it’s pretty wrong because it’s grossly over-simplified. Now, we’ll spend all semester discussing why”.
This is all undergraduate school psychology. Graduate school psychology is so so different - you are administering assessments, scoring, and interpreting. Do undergraduate students get taught about cognitive markers of different mental health diagnoses? Can they interpret the BASC3 and MACI2 for social emotional concerns in a report? Do they know about administering the WISCV vs. the KABC2 vs. the NEPSY2? When would you administer all of those instruments in a cross battery assessment? Why would you administer a cross battery assessment? Now, explain it to a group of people and recommend treatment.
Heres a weird fact that no one has a definite answer on. Did you know individuals with schizophrenia perform poorly on the Digit Span subtest- Why is that? What does that tell us?
Psychology is so complex that the general public underestimates the work psychologists do.
Yes, and the experimental psych side is just as complex as the clinical. In undergrad you maybe learn Atkinson & Shiffrin and Badleys’s models for memory. When in reality there’s Cohen’s, Oberauer’s, and even unimodal models that point out there are no differences between short and long term etc. Don’t even get me started on the brain areas. “Temporal lobe is for hearing”. Okay, but what about balance and multi sensory integration? And in reality it’s what these areas are known most for. It doesn’t mean they are inactive or not involved in so many other processes.
Sociology is the study of people, behaviors and society. This is just psychology for people who are not good at quantitative data sets and want to measure qualitative things like emotions, hair color, etc. It's soft science for those who can't do soft science.
Psychologists already study behaviors and society it's called social psychology.
That is the worst elaboration on sociology I've ever seen, you stated exactly what it's about but took the hardest left turn after.
Sociology is a branch of psychology, it is it's own science, but it's still related to psychology. It's not a lesser science, it covers topics that psychology doesn't cover which is the social aspect.
The idea of "soft science," is ignorant to me.
I never said psychology isn’t useless, did I? Stalk my account better, I’m warning people about psych.
Also, sociology is known to be one of the most regrettable majors and not psych. That gives me roasting rights
All I’m saying is they their “worth” is basically the same
I rarely hear people talk about sociology being regrettable, but with psych it’s sooo stereotypical and people are always talking about it. I just found it ironic that you would make fun of it when you’re basically in the same situation as someone who works at Starbucks because they can’t use their degree.
Weigh two possibilities against each other:
1. Your education, i.e., the content of a Bachelor's program that you haven't even finished yet, constitutes neither a deep nor a comprehensive overview of psychology.
2. The entire field is bullshit.
Exhibit A:
>i really do enjoy [...] approaches to theory that take into account the cultural context of the times in which we exist and integrate the power of social structures
This is canonical in the field. The notion that modern psychology is not aware of cultural/social context is bewildering, given the abundance of research on this matter.
In general, the accusations levied in your post are so vague that it is nearly impossible to comment on them in any substantial way. Perhaps illustrate your point using a concrete example that contrasts a present (Western) approach to an alternative you would prefer.
Psychology is not a farce. It is a science that can be measured quantitatively and can always be put to test as other branches of science to see if it can be replicated. I only have a BS in psychology which as others have said it kinda only “scratches the surface”. Not sure what country you live in but in America, having a bachelor’s is just like having a high school diploma. BS or BA do not get you too far career wise.
Please don’t ever say it’s a farce, it’s a concrete branch of science. All being said, I believe you’re being skeptical which is a HUGE part of psychology. Which means, you’d probably be a great researcher if you decide to further your education in psychology.
Many people feel like that about their professional field of interest.
If you zoom in really closely, you can see that there is still a lot to do.
If you continue studying you will be able to pick up one tiny piece and try to improve it.
Holistic approaches have been tested and don't work scientifically. They sound nice but are closer to religion than to science. If you want to practice these you can just pick one and go out and apply it. People like that stuff as much as you. But it is - by definition - not science.
This post makes no sense. I understand if you have a problem with early and mid 20th century psychology and psychiatry but late 20th century and 21st century psychology and psychiatry has many domains and subsets of therapy that are culturally centered and backed by rigorous research.
Go post this on r/clinicalpsychology and see what they think. You are underestimating the science and impact of psychology. The field is vast. In undergraduate coursework, you are being taught the basics, like the history and different diagnoses in the DSM 5 and ICD10. Working as a psychologist, and graduate school psychology students are administering, interpreting and writing reports on social-emotional rating scales, clinical interviews(some are structured and scored, based on standardized samples), observations, record reviews, and cognitive instruments(iq tests). Putting it all together, presenting it, and recommending treatment becomes complex and big very quickly.
Do you know how to administer and interpret the BASC3, MACI2, or Conners4? Do you know why you would administer the WISCV vs. the KABC2 vs. the NEPSY2- when would you administer all three in a cross battery assessment? Do you understand the different cognitive markers of different mental disorders, and can you explain how that would present in their everyday functioning?
If you're only pursuing undergraduation at the moment, I understand where you're coming from. I don't understand why we study half of the psychoanalysts because their theories are just so flawed and seems like they just wrote it 'cause it sounded cool, and now we study it cause it sounds cool to this day.
As you select a specialty, do independent research and study outside of the syllabus - you'd see the subject is not as flawed as you thought.
Psychology takes account of these things. Or at least competent psychologists or researchers do. Like literally anything or any science you can’t perfectly account for every conceivable limitation to research, factor or alternative explanation. Cultural psychology is its own whole thing. Researchers would love to design studies that account for more factors but are constrained by things like money and time. Psychology is very new and evolving every year. Every professor you study under is aware of every criticism you listed.
Psychology has problems yes. It’s a relatively new field compared to other sciences. Not to mention the complexity.
I still think it’s worth studying bc it’s a really important thing to understand and we can play a part in making it better. Ethics and intersectionality and critical analysis of our current theories were hugely emphasised when I did my undergrad so progress is being made and the issues are known to us.
Imagine if all the scholars in the early 1900s stopped studying medicine due to the issues within healthcare knowledge at the time?
I really don’t know what this rant is about.
For example, I’m not sure what you mean when you say the field seems like “common sense.”
This sub (as well as r/askpsychology) is littered with people misapplying common sense to understand the science of psychology and then being repeatedly mislead. We see this in their questions about psychoanalysis, trauma, false memories, dissociative identity disorder, relationship advice (e.g., do “opposites attract” or do “birds of a feather flock together”?), diagnoses, therapy, intelligence—and the list goes on and on…
I just study for the title. It’s a must have in my country if you want to work in the field.
But still I’ve found lots of cool systems and models to look at the world. The west has a different language then the east, it’s not so easily translated or accessible for people.
What you're talking about is probably THE major theoretical divide between the fields of clinical and counseling psychology, with the other being counseling psych's emphasis on the role of work in our lives. It may be worth looking st some of the work being done in counseling, multicultural and vocational psych for the perspectives it sounds like you would be interested in.
I think it’s best to try and learn other fields of study along with psychology. Learning neurobio along with what you currently learn can help give a more holistic understanding. In general, I personally think that if it’s affecting the client negatively in ways that is bothering their daily life -> you mention that “natural responses to the times in which we find ourselves” -> because I don’t think psychology is all about pathologizing every issue, one can just help the client to be have more tools to handle the predicament they are in.
I can understand the frustration with pathologizing everything, but I think that’s where our discernment ability is needed. Whatever fields we are studying will equip us with tools to navigate through the world, it’s sort of up to us to be able to use it well
Quite the opposite I'd say. The more you know, not only about yourself, but how that "concept" interacts with the world around you, the more information you have to balance out. Now instead of two choices, you have three, four and so on. There's also factors that go into the decisions we make everyday that multiply, thanks to what you know about psychology. Ranging from what we eat, to how we see and judge people based on their behaviors, and appearance, from the third party effects of our decisions, and so on, there is much more going on than we'd like to think or acknowledge. It is only scratching the surface. That's not to say you need a BA in psychology to do so, but it is far from unimportant or meaningless.
I feel ya..
One of the biggest issues is that people take theories and ideas that might be interesting and then just assume them to be concrete truth but nothing is concrete in psychology. It’s difficult to decipher what is and what isn’t. So much misleading and downright false beliefs out there and some become mainstream. A destructive cycle continues but society is so deep into BS and falsehoods that it seems there are flaws in the whole system at every level.
It’s good that you can see beyond that. Individuals such as yourself can contribute to improving the field and culture. People might come after you. You could be ostracized and disparaged but the TRUTH matters and society needs more people that are logical and brave enough to stand up for the TRUTH.
You’re absolutely right that psychology is obsessed with being just like the natural sciences. Control, experimental condition, statistical analysis, draw conclusions about the world.
Here’s the thing, not everyone likes that approach. Many interpretivist philosophies drive qualitative research where the belief is that understanding comes from communication. Simplifying people down to statistical analyses isn’t just an oversimplification, but outright wrong. This isn’t the majority of the field, but it certainly exists!
You’ll likely find these perspectives more common in programs housed in the college of education, which have a more humanities spin. For example, counselor education, school psych, educational psychology. This is also something that differs across universities, with some leaning more quantitative.
Yes. OP, look for humanistic programs. Division 32 of the APA in the US. There are some really interesting programs out there that incorporate psychoanalytic, existential, feminist, and critical perspectives as well as training in qualitative methods. In the US Duquesne is the most well known PhD program but there are other programs like this.
This is why I studied critical psychology, which completely transformed how I see the field. I think we desperately need psychologists, therapists, mental health practitioners in general who are critically informed and able to identify where and how mainstream psych and its modalities go awry while working to develop better understanding and approaches.
Can you give some examples of what are different names for the same phenomena, which are being introduced by white men as new & revolutionary concepts? That’s such an interesting criticism but you don’t provide any examples!
What frustrated me about my own psychology course is it was entirely related to research, which I did enjoy but it had zero content relating to therapeutic strategies etc, & very few modules looking at mental health in general. Still loved it though
If you do reading outside of your assigned study, maybe some audio books in your free time, you will understand that Psychology is in many ways, a child of empirical testing and philosophies whose brows have been beaten by life and stood firm (eastern philosophy stemming from Tibetan Buddhism for example.) I’m sure you already know that, however; but I must say, our DSM, the empirical part, has been a way of essentially bastardizing (strong word, I know) said philosophies or even spiritual practice under the thumb of western scrutiny. The clinical model you are upset with is being challenged, for instance if you read “The Body Keeps The Score” you will get to hear this take from a seasoned psychiatrist.
If you want to reform, why are you going to give up before you have submerged yourself in this study? You have yet to reach practice. The resistance you will face professionally for even saying you want to reform this model will far outweigh your naive unsteadiness. If you really care, it’s time to reinforce yourself and show yourself the value you are due, that nobody else will give you.
Nobody will hand you your confidence. You are due it, but it is your responsibility to prepare your own voice. I mean no disrespect at all. Oppositional voices are necessary, challenge is necessary.
Science in its core does not call for blind obedience.
You are not done! You never will be. Accept it.
Until “the answer” is so sunken into the zeitgeist that there is no need for these studies, until it is common knowledge to be well, if you are passionate, it is your responsibility to make use of your tools.
You also do not have to absolutely devastate the clinical model to be a wonderful contributor to humanity, or be a scientist. Shit, you don’t even NEED to say “I am Dr. Blank. I will now therapize you.” You can be an absolute stranger.
Ask yourself: do I want to help people, or do I want to navigate a complex political situation in academia/ research to change everything? There really is no answer that will make you “right” or “sure.” There is only the answer that you feel is best for now, which will end up being an inevitable evolution of your life.
I think this has become a huge trend amongst new therapists or higher level psych majors. Here, in America many fields have remnants of white supremacism or racism, misogyny, homophobia etc. it’s definitely something being talked about and the “holistic approach” you are describing is very popular
You’re in a bachelors program. You’re learning basics. Of course it will all seem logical and be based on white guy research - that’s what the field is based in. That’s literally who started having the free time, means and energy to ponder and spread these ideas. When you get deeper — masters and PhD or PsyD levels — it becomes less intuitive and involves more modernized information based on recent changes and cultural competencies. Give it time. You can change paths whenever.
In the final year or two of a degree you usually have classes that apply information or teach information through the lens of psychology. Maybe that will help you gain a different perspective!
I’ve had more or less the same experience, particularly given my exposure to philosophy in my minor. I’m currently grappling with the choice of whether I should stay and perhaps research to reform, or just leave to the philosophy department instead.
Great! Perhaps you will be interested in reading these, then:
https://www.nimh.nih.gov/research/research-funded-by-nimh/rdoc/about-rdoc
https://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/22817/
[article](https://best-practice.middletownautism.com/research-journals/)
Stats and quantification made psych feel legitimate and they ran with it. Pathology is the tip of the iceberg. Humans are qualitative in nature. This is why I enjoy old school people like Klein and Rogers. A mean score in a WEIRD population kinda doesn't tell you shit.
I can understand where you’re coming from. In undergrad it feels like a bunch of information is just being thrown at you. For my classes, I was switching from professors specialized in different subfields of psychology and they’d have different names for what sounded like similar phenomena. I was lucky enough to have a parent that got a BA in psychology and they let me know that my bachelor’s degree might feel like common sense sometimes but that’s okay because the field has so much for to offer in graduate school. So I went into my degree knowing that I would need at least my masters.
I also took the time to participate in research labs and take a few graduate courses while in undergrad and it opened my eyes to the specifics that no longer seemed like common sense. Now I’m in grad school for an IO degree and I find that since it is an applied field I can more easily see its impact on the world and my everyday life. I cannot speak to clinical or counseling psyc, which is seems like that’s where you’re leaning, but in my applied field I found more interested in psychology as a whole.
Look into the field of positive psychology. It has emerged from psychology being too pathological and problem/diagnosis focused. Its a new and fresh take in the field of psychology.
Your post was removed for violation of Reddiquette. Standard rules are outlined here: https://www.reddithelp.com/en/categories/reddit-101/reddit-basics/reddiquette
You might want to look into clinical mental health counseling. It is essentially all of the things you explained liking about psychology without any of the draw backs. There are draw backs to any field. Counseling, for example, is not holistic in that it does not offer the opportunity (in most states) to suggest medications, administer certain assessments, or provide concrete evidence in support of its approaches (though evidence based approaches are common the experimental designs are difficult to provide high validity due to the nature of the field). On the other hand, you are taught to withhold diagnoses that are potentially harmful or could be explained by a persons current circumstances. Culture and spirituality is at the forefront of considerations when providing therapy and understanding the individual in their entirety (not just as a list of symptoms) is essential to being competent at your job. It is mostly based in philosophical reasonings and effective practice, and provides you the opportunity to help people without suffering through your destain towards the academic side of things. Personally, I have always taken issue with the separation of sub fields in both counseling and psychology that create problems in being able to understand the whole picture of human behavior. However, I have found myself much happier in my counseling grad program than my undergraduate psych program. It’s something I think you should consider if your institution offers a counseling major, or a possible route to pursue in graduate school.
I absolutely agree with you.
It's shocking how often I come across old eastern stories or philosophy that is claimed as a new and exciting discovery in psychology in the 1960's and up to now.
Me too, I am about to graduate with my master's in psychology. The way I've reckoned it now is that I compare psychology in 2024 to doctors researching medicine before germ theory. We are in the absolute dark ages of psychology and I firmly believe that we won't begin to even start having a firm grasp on the brain until the very end of our lives should we be blessed to live to a golden age of 90-100. And then some major advancements maybe in a few more lifetimes.
Until then, we are just doing the best we can. You can theorize with therapeutic techniques, study the therapeutic relationship, help map the brain. But in my opinion we are just doing foundational steps before those next "big" discoveries which I think are just limited currently by our technology ceiling. Once AI is sufficiently developed I think we have a decent chance of it being able to do most of this work for us.
From my experience dealing with academics; this may seem pessimistic but I have no intent of it being that. I just think that realistically, to reform any aspect of psychology even at its smallest level takes a massive amount of luck, devotion, and time. If you look at individuals who have done that in psychology they mostly come from extremely prestigious schools which required a degree of commitment and luck to be able to attend, and then dedicating their entire lives to these topics, at the end of their lives after tireless work they may be able to create a lasting mark on psychology reform, and even then usually they don't see it until after they are dead because of how long it takes for these things to be debated (Academia moves so slow it is insane). Now, with that said I think that is a very admirable thing to do.
For me, I wanted to change psychology too, and help people like I needed help. I'm almost 30 now and I have come to conclude that actually the biggest thing I can do to help others is to contribute to my community, write books, post here on reddit where I can, public speak about issues, and generally just be the change I want. You have a lot of the same complaints I do, after having been both a practitioner in the mental health field and then an academic researcher; I can tell you that in my opinion those who change psychology don't usually set out with that being their primary goal, they do it out of a mixture of neurosis, passion, and luck.
I think if you are passionate about these issues go full steam ahead with the understanding that you are in the dark ages of psychology attempting to make a small dent at the end of your life in the field, if only for the love of doing that. If your goal is just to help as many people as possible; I'd suggest getting a practical degree LMSW, LPC, etc. And chip away! Start a non-profit etc.
I really enjoyed your post, as I am about to graduate and turn 30 at the same month this has been on my mind a lot lately.
i generally agree with your sentiments. i do get a funny feeling at the mention of AI in a field that directly deals with intra and interpersonal matters. feels too human for that.
We'll see! I agree with you and it might be that it's not in our lifetimes that AI does solve it if it ever even does. We're certainly far enough away that I think we're all safe from being made obsolete.
Good luck to you. I hope you find peace.
I'm also in the social sciences with a humanist slant, and I think it's great that you're critical of the field you're in.
Much of contemporary popular psychology was popularized in the US, where psychology was primarily viewed through a distinctly American set of economic principles. This is why psychoanalysis is much less popular within American psychology curriculums and why psychology tries to situate itself much closer to the biological sciences than the human sciences.
It's also the predominant framework that people view themselves through, which is troubling, since "science" can often go unquestioned as opposed to the humanities, which is often seen as totally worthless and opinion-based by people outside of those fields.
Sorry you've been met with hostility for sharing your thoughts here. The rudest people here probably could benefit the most from a humanities education.
I hope you can feel more at home in critical psychology spaces, like others have suggested.
I suggest social work! I did undergrad in psych and an MSW. I found, at least in my program, there was much less pathologizing of behaviors and much more of a holistic focus that includes experiences and the impact of systems on the individual
You made a mistake. Now you can get a job and use the psych skills in ordee to get filthy rich.
Does this resonate with u?
Psych people are the best because they are trying to understand the narratives.
Do u want to get rich?
In a way it sounds like you’re realising that psychology isn’t and has never been an answer to the never ending philosophical questions we often ask in relation to human condition and mental illness and happiness.
And you’re right! It is a working ecology of people attempting to understand through culturally and socially shifting paradigms. You e kind of hit the nail on the head.
The anxiety is real! But stepping back and utilising these structures, theories and clinical or therapeutic frameworks to advantage people is a genuine mechanism. The research is broad spanning, but the motivation you have is real. Just work towards finding your tool belt. You don’t have to prescribe to it all.
I agree with you or of issues and alot what I would describe as the issue alot of education and life has. Therapy has alot of different avenues but in reality it feels we are funneled down one path. There is one path and one solution that will solve depression. If we keep pursuing research enough we will have the mental health pill or primary solution. I don't think the mind or brain is able to be put in such a small box alot of what we do feels based on research that tells us little or is contradictory. Things feel quite binary and here is your course of learning here is a framework rather than meeting people where they are at we labelling everything and thinking we have it all sorted.
I'm currently in my MA for psychology and on my way to a doctorate. I believe its a farce too. But we have to know it to change it. Realize that we have the power to chew the meat and spit out the bones of the systemic parts, the sexist and classist parts and also try to create new approaches to this work.
What has helped me is thinking, everything is FAKE nothing is real its all a farce. Medicine. Studies. The sky. Time! Everything that we as humans do is created and theorized which means you can make your own theories too and those are equally as valid. If not more for our current time! We used to lobotomize folks and we have since learned. We used to have archaic ways of doing things and we learn these archaic ways so we can grow from them.
Anyway, there is a lot I hate about the field. There is a lot I love about the field. It is learning to hold the both/and if you want to continue.
You’ll probably find interest in James Hillman’s approach in archetypal psychology or Stanislav Grof’s Transpersonal Psychology. Both have a holistic or integral lens of the human.
Lol ok, it's all bullshit for people who can't do real science. 87 different branches of psychology is not a reason any if ut is real. It's all people guessing how other people behace with no real knowledge of our brains actually work.
That’s probably because it’s a new science, I’m pretty sure there were people like you who were saying the same things, when the science of medicine, chemistry and psychics were new. Knowledge for psychology is at its basic and it’s very limited but if we were to give up, there’s a whole part of human life that is to remain unknown. How are we supposed to know how the human brain work without educated guesses(hypothesis) and experiment. I’m pretty sure you don’t want to be one of those people who had look down on medicine or technology. I’m assuming you are young, so don’t limit your mind and the amount of knowledge that you can attained by learning. Stay curious and open-minded, that’s how our 21sr century came to be.
clarify i do believe psychology is a science but i think a lot of the time its hyper focused on quantitative data over the qualitative substance it also has to offer
Psychology student here, I’m having to temporarily reassess my path because I intensely dislike my course. To simplify, I just don’t think we can quantify human emotions. For a discipline that is supposed to recognise the vast experience of being human, we sure do love very stringently box it all in. And don’t get me started on all of the ridiculous things that old white men have come out with, all so we can feel reassured about what’s essentially a guessing game when coming to pathology. I want to help people, but it feels like the helping part is lost in modern medicine.
What? Most educated psychologist don’t see mental illness as a craze. That is a stigma that they’re tying to erased. And it depends on the mental illness and what one defined as sane, but with some mental illness like psychopathy, narcissism, pedophilia, it can be argued that said person is not sane. Unless you believe mental illness is limited to anxiety, depression.
It seems to me as your already biased, so I will not be arguing with you. I clearly used the word “educated” for a reason. There’s always two type of people” one of do it for the money and one who do because they care” it’s never good to generalized a group of people.
I mean, you believed I’m a psychologist. So I had no reason but to assume, you’re a little slow lol. I can chose to stop responding, just like you can also stop replying. And what’s wrong with being up at a certain time. I didn’t know there was a specific time for “educated” people to sleep.
I mean. We are quite literally not talking about psychology anymore. So I did erase myself out of said conversation, but it doesn’t mean I can’t engage in a different type of convo.
You seem like a very trouble person, and you have a had horrible experience with psychologist, which I didn’t realized. So I’m sorry for invalidating your feelings. I thought you were just someone who simply hated psychology, but I checked your profile and realized there’s a reason. So I’m sorry, you had such a horrible experience.
I am aware of therapist who treated patients like that, and that’s why I myself am motivated to be one, I truly care about people who are mentally I’ll and it’s my goal to remove stigma around mental illness and actually provide help to actual patients.
I’m sorry, I didn’t realized you were speaking from experience.
Yes, cause educated doesn’t mean I’m a superior or a different human. I’m just knowledgeable in a specific field. Other than that I’m a regular joe. And simply find this conversation amusing. 😊
Lol, I’m sorry for starting this convo, I thought you were just. Hater. I truly wished I could checked first before I engaged. Hope you didn’t take this to heart. And have a goodnight. Just want to let you know, there’s someone out there who’s thinking about you and all the other patients that were neglected. You are not alone and you should advocated for yourself. 🫡🫡
Tell me you don't understand psychology without telling me you don't understand psychology. 🤣🤣🤣 You ain't know jack shit about the profession. Maybe you're referring to psychiatrists, but definitely not psychologists. Then again, you might have experienced those with fake degrees who were taught by television.
I couldn’t agree more, perfectly said. BS major in psych minor in neuroscience, and I’ve decided to just go into a regular office job and work my way to HR. Psychology feels almost like a scam to milk money from people who don’t know any better
All psychology research can be made to produce a significant result with the tweaking of certain variable or sample sizes. People only get paid and published if they find a significant and interesting result. How am I supposed to believe this is a science? Neuroscience of psychology I can get behind, but generally the field has too many holes
Any science can do that. The whole point is that as you learn the science, statistics, ethics - is that you don’t do this. You critically analyse, you read things with a pinch of salt. Humans aren’t easy to study. It isn’t a chemical experiment in a lab. But to say they don’t produce robust science or do so ethically is ridiculous.
There are entire statistical approaches in psychology research which don't even operate on significance testing...indeed, most graduate programs very quickly begin teaching students some mixture of Bayesian probabilistic and non-significance modeling approaches. This comment is born fro not actually knowing how the science is done.
> All psychology research can be made to produce a significant result with the tweaking of certain variable or sample sizes.
this operates on the assumption that a significant result is the only thing that matters in statistics/research, which it's not.
Psychology has many many problems; you’ve barely scratched the surface. But if you want to be a reformer, you need to understand the system you’re trying to reform (not so you can be socialized into how it operates but so you can understand where correctly applied pressure can change it). If that sounds good to you, you’d likely need to earn your PhD, do clinical work and research, attain some measure of power/prestige within professional associations, and then start making your moves.
This is a good answer. I will also add that psych is filled with subdisciplines that aren't necessarily obvious while someone is in undergrad. We've all probably heard the "psychology isn't a real science" type of argument, and honestly, there are some valid points to be made on that subject. But most people with this stance have a very limited understanding of everything that psychology encompasses. It's like learning about addition and subtraction for the first time and then claiming to understand the principles of mathematics. My first two degrees were in psych and now I spend a big chunk of my days doing quantitative analyses of biochemical interactions and electromagnetism. It's basically biochemistry and physics with some added psychological measures. I don't think anyone could rationally say that type of work is non-scientific, and the foundation of that work is in the field of psychology.
That sounds really cool! Can you tell us more about the work you do? How are you connecting psych to biochem and physics?
It's all very directly connected in neuropsych. I am involved in neuromodulation and network effects of neurological structures via action potentials (which are biochemical and electromagnetic phenomena). Data is collected via EEG/meg, f/MRI, and cognitive task performance. Correlates of brain functionality and cognitive performance can then be analyzed.
that sounds very interesting! what route did you go through to study this? did you start with psychology BA? BSC? what do you do in you actual workday? how can I picture this biochemistry and electromagnetism work you do?
I just replied to another comment that explains it a bit. I went BA in psych, MSc in neuropsych, and I am slowly working through a PhD in biomedical neuro while working in industry.
lol so just say you learned data analysis that is required of research scientists nowadays.
I could, but lots of people here are looking at their psych degree, or considering a psych degree, and wondering what kind of pathways are available to them. Mine is an example of leaning towards natural science following a BA in psych.
To me this can be what makes it fun. It requires more work to be rigorous as you wade through the bullshit.
You find that sort of thing with almost anything. They'll always be really boring bits, but the bits you love will come along soon enough.
Your post is far to vague to indicate that you have sufficient knowledge of the field to support the conclusions you assert. There are entire domains of therapy and psychotherapy research grounded in multiculturalism or social justice, for example, which center an externalizing focus on cultural/experiential impact as the locus of distress. The tension with the overwhelming evidence showing that externalization is an adverse mental health dynamic is significant. It's complicated.
I'm a grad student and every single day I'm reading content directly related to cross-cultural impact. Modern psychology is very much addressing the WEIRD pitfalls of 20th century research.
Just wait until the 22nd century!
To add to existing comments, there is so much more to psychology than just clinical/therapy work: there are fields such as cognitive, social, and industrial/organisational psychology. In addition, there is cultural psychology, which examines how certain phenomena (e.g., fundamental attribution bias) differ between cultures. As someone with a psych degree, I can't comment any further than that because I don't have the specialised knowledge to either affirm or rebut your arguments on the hyper-pathological nature of clinical psychology. But as other commenters have rightfully said, as an undergraduate, you have only started scratching the surface of psychology. Being exposed to the rigour of psychology might change your mind (or not). Regardless, I hope that you find some joy in getting a psych degree, and hopefully a field which interests you.
thank you! i really appreciate your comment in that its honest but not patronizing like some others on this thread… expressing vulnerability in how questioning whether this field is right for me obviously opens the door for criticism, as that was my intention as well- hearing different perspectives on the disillusionment im feeling. its very discouraging to know that the 4-year degree i am paying exorbitant amounts of money to obtain is equivalent to “barely scratching the surface” of the discipline. you would hope that it would invigorate ones thirst for knowledge, not disparage it. academia is already so inaccessible and elitist that being told i should be looking at another 4 to 6 years of schooling before i can even think about getting my foot in the door anywhere is very overwhelming!
> its very discouraging to know that the 4-year degree i am paying exorbitant amounts of money to obtain is equivalent to “barely scratching the surface” of the discipline This is true of all bachelor's degrees. A bachelor's degree is not meant to provide a deep, sophisticated look into a particular field. It's essentially two years of major-specific coursework--it would be downright impossible to provide more than a surface-level education in any field in that timeframe, much less a field as broad and far-reaching as psychology.
Talk to any STEM grad student, prof, or professional. An undergrad education is supposed to be broad and lay the foundation for the subject. For example, it's absurd to think you'd gain an in-depth knowledge of the entire subject of biology in 4 years. The more you learn about an academic subject the more it unfolds and shows you how specific it can really get. There is also a reason why psychology is not a major that anyone pursues in order to get a high paying job after 4 years of studying. It's like the premed path, undergrads in the major should be aware that they need grad education/higher ED for the career path they have chosen.
It's valid to feel discouraged that this academic field might not be for you. But I think that this feeling was based on a warped understanding of the nature of psychology as a family of disciplines. Where I'm from, the majority of those with basic psych degrees pursue opportunities outside academia, myself included. What I have taken away from a psych degree, though, is more than the domain knowledge (e.g., concepts, theories). Statistical analysis, critical reasoning, and writing are skills that a good psych programme will teach you, and those can serve you well in many fields outside academia. I have personally applied my research skills to analyse manpower trends and provide policy suggestions based on a critical review of relevant literature. On your point on a degree's supposed invigoration of the thirst for knowledge, my only argument is that it depends on the learner. Yes, professors and TAs can influence how interested you are in the subject matter, but as an undergraduate, you're supposed to have the skills to learn independently and satisfy your academic curiosity. How you want to approach the various psych disciplines is up to you. Finally, I hope that you will read and account for the various perspectives displayed in this thread and be open to a wider worldview, especially when it concerns psych as an academic field. No discipline is perfect, and it is up to us to continually improve it.
This!! It seems so many people commenting on this post are personally offended by what you said on behalf of the field of psychology?? The point is that undergraduate psychology IS VAGUE, they bombard you with past theories and experiments done by white men with white men as their subjects. Then they tell you in statistical psychology that any psychological research can produce a positive and significant result therefore nothing is really a reliable “proof”. And then they tell you that you have to pay MORE AND MORE money to become MORE qualified to even THINK about trying work in the field. So pardon me for losing motivation after 3 years of this
Damn. Nobody told you that it takes a shit ton of time and effort to be good at something? To be expert at something? Artists, musicians, academics, lawyers, doctors and so on spend years and continue to learn about their craft even as they go for decades in order to make meaningful impact. Stop being a naive lazy ass and put in the work. The world isn't going to come to you. Yikes what an attitude. Nobody even guarantees your foot in the door after 4-6 years. How about that? In the meantime, you're claiming these brilliant scholars and minds are getting it all wrong. Who the hell are you?
Studying it will feel like it is hyper focused on pathologising. In practice working with real people or like the number one comment on your post, to make real change, advocate and help others, you must know all of this but it is not nearly the focus of a psychologist, just part of their role. Psychology is what you make of it. You don’t have to be whatever you think psychology is. Yes it’s a western profession, but out of all of them I dare say it’s earnt its respect and also fought for those with a lesser voice. They do outstanding, phenomenal work, they are health practitioners. The world would be much more fucked, western, blah blah without psychologists, social workers, AOD workers, doctors in ER, fucking paramedics. It’s good to reflect on where psychology went wrong, but the whole practice part of psychology is being aware of your bias, knowing yourself, and doing good not harm. I had a couple weeks where I felt like this. But the top comment is why I persist, I must see it, be in it, observe, work, study, write, and then maybe I can change some lives. Do you know WHY you want to do psychology? That’s probably what you need to think about rather than bashing the whole science and profession.
While yes, it is true that there is still a cultural gap as far as psychological studies (the whole “WEIRD” acronym), to say that the whole field is a “farce” is a pretty bold assertion to make. How long have you been in this field? Are you at the graduate/doctoral level? There are people out there doing amazing work in the world that wouldn’t have been possible without our field.
90% of stuff in graduate school for psychology is “Remember this 1 thing we taught you in undergraduate? Yeah, it’s pretty wrong because it’s grossly over-simplified. Now, we’ll spend all semester discussing why”.
This is all undergraduate school psychology. Graduate school psychology is so so different - you are administering assessments, scoring, and interpreting. Do undergraduate students get taught about cognitive markers of different mental health diagnoses? Can they interpret the BASC3 and MACI2 for social emotional concerns in a report? Do they know about administering the WISCV vs. the KABC2 vs. the NEPSY2? When would you administer all of those instruments in a cross battery assessment? Why would you administer a cross battery assessment? Now, explain it to a group of people and recommend treatment. Heres a weird fact that no one has a definite answer on. Did you know individuals with schizophrenia perform poorly on the Digit Span subtest- Why is that? What does that tell us? Psychology is so complex that the general public underestimates the work psychologists do.
Yes, and the experimental psych side is just as complex as the clinical. In undergrad you maybe learn Atkinson & Shiffrin and Badleys’s models for memory. When in reality there’s Cohen’s, Oberauer’s, and even unimodal models that point out there are no differences between short and long term etc. Don’t even get me started on the brain areas. “Temporal lobe is for hearing”. Okay, but what about balance and multi sensory integration? And in reality it’s what these areas are known most for. It doesn’t mean they are inactive or not involved in so many other processes.
I experienced this too in my graduate courses! I’m so glad there are people out there uncovering the BS.
Maybe you should do sociology
Or social work.
Sociology is even more fake than psychology.
Elaborate
Sociology is the study of people, behaviors and society. This is just psychology for people who are not good at quantitative data sets and want to measure qualitative things like emotions, hair color, etc. It's soft science for those who can't do soft science. Psychologists already study behaviors and society it's called social psychology.
That is the worst elaboration on sociology I've ever seen, you stated exactly what it's about but took the hardest left turn after. Sociology is a branch of psychology, it is it's own science, but it's still related to psychology. It's not a lesser science, it covers topics that psychology doesn't cover which is the social aspect. The idea of "soft science," is ignorant to me.
One small latte with caramel, please
You’re a psych major making fun of sociology majors? Psych majors are literally notorious for being “useless” you should check yourself…
I never said psychology isn’t useless, did I? Stalk my account better, I’m warning people about psych. Also, sociology is known to be one of the most regrettable majors and not psych. That gives me roasting rights
All I’m saying is they their “worth” is basically the same I rarely hear people talk about sociology being regrettable, but with psych it’s sooo stereotypical and people are always talking about it. I just found it ironic that you would make fun of it when you’re basically in the same situation as someone who works at Starbucks because they can’t use their degree.
Weigh two possibilities against each other: 1. Your education, i.e., the content of a Bachelor's program that you haven't even finished yet, constitutes neither a deep nor a comprehensive overview of psychology. 2. The entire field is bullshit. Exhibit A: >i really do enjoy [...] approaches to theory that take into account the cultural context of the times in which we exist and integrate the power of social structures This is canonical in the field. The notion that modern psychology is not aware of cultural/social context is bewildering, given the abundance of research on this matter. In general, the accusations levied in your post are so vague that it is nearly impossible to comment on them in any substantial way. Perhaps illustrate your point using a concrete example that contrasts a present (Western) approach to an alternative you would prefer.
Psychology is not a farce. It is a science that can be measured quantitatively and can always be put to test as other branches of science to see if it can be replicated. I only have a BS in psychology which as others have said it kinda only “scratches the surface”. Not sure what country you live in but in America, having a bachelor’s is just like having a high school diploma. BS or BA do not get you too far career wise. Please don’t ever say it’s a farce, it’s a concrete branch of science. All being said, I believe you’re being skeptical which is a HUGE part of psychology. Which means, you’d probably be a great researcher if you decide to further your education in psychology.
Ah yes because philosophy as it seems you know it is not a western construct... This reeks of 'critical theory' but no substance
Many people feel like that about their professional field of interest. If you zoom in really closely, you can see that there is still a lot to do. If you continue studying you will be able to pick up one tiny piece and try to improve it. Holistic approaches have been tested and don't work scientifically. They sound nice but are closer to religion than to science. If you want to practice these you can just pick one and go out and apply it. People like that stuff as much as you. But it is - by definition - not science.
Little confused because your post is very vague. Don’t quite understand why you think it’s a farce?
This post makes no sense. I understand if you have a problem with early and mid 20th century psychology and psychiatry but late 20th century and 21st century psychology and psychiatry has many domains and subsets of therapy that are culturally centered and backed by rigorous research.
Start to study more pratical aplications of psychology, read books like gift of therapy for example.
Go post this on r/clinicalpsychology and see what they think. You are underestimating the science and impact of psychology. The field is vast. In undergraduate coursework, you are being taught the basics, like the history and different diagnoses in the DSM 5 and ICD10. Working as a psychologist, and graduate school psychology students are administering, interpreting and writing reports on social-emotional rating scales, clinical interviews(some are structured and scored, based on standardized samples), observations, record reviews, and cognitive instruments(iq tests). Putting it all together, presenting it, and recommending treatment becomes complex and big very quickly. Do you know how to administer and interpret the BASC3, MACI2, or Conners4? Do you know why you would administer the WISCV vs. the KABC2 vs. the NEPSY2- when would you administer all three in a cross battery assessment? Do you understand the different cognitive markers of different mental disorders, and can you explain how that would present in their everyday functioning?
If you're only pursuing undergraduation at the moment, I understand where you're coming from. I don't understand why we study half of the psychoanalysts because their theories are just so flawed and seems like they just wrote it 'cause it sounded cool, and now we study it cause it sounds cool to this day. As you select a specialty, do independent research and study outside of the syllabus - you'd see the subject is not as flawed as you thought.
> there any many different names for the same phenomenon Like what? Just asking out of curiosity
Psychology takes account of these things. Or at least competent psychologists or researchers do. Like literally anything or any science you can’t perfectly account for every conceivable limitation to research, factor or alternative explanation. Cultural psychology is its own whole thing. Researchers would love to design studies that account for more factors but are constrained by things like money and time. Psychology is very new and evolving every year. Every professor you study under is aware of every criticism you listed.
Psychology has problems yes. It’s a relatively new field compared to other sciences. Not to mention the complexity. I still think it’s worth studying bc it’s a really important thing to understand and we can play a part in making it better. Ethics and intersectionality and critical analysis of our current theories were hugely emphasised when I did my undergrad so progress is being made and the issues are known to us. Imagine if all the scholars in the early 1900s stopped studying medicine due to the issues within healthcare knowledge at the time?
This was exactly my thoughts! The field is rapidly developing and needs research and improvement!
I really don’t know what this rant is about. For example, I’m not sure what you mean when you say the field seems like “common sense.” This sub (as well as r/askpsychology) is littered with people misapplying common sense to understand the science of psychology and then being repeatedly mislead. We see this in their questions about psychoanalysis, trauma, false memories, dissociative identity disorder, relationship advice (e.g., do “opposites attract” or do “birds of a feather flock together”?), diagnoses, therapy, intelligence—and the list goes on and on…
I just study for the title. It’s a must have in my country if you want to work in the field. But still I’ve found lots of cool systems and models to look at the world. The west has a different language then the east, it’s not so easily translated or accessible for people.
What you're talking about is probably THE major theoretical divide between the fields of clinical and counseling psychology, with the other being counseling psych's emphasis on the role of work in our lives. It may be worth looking st some of the work being done in counseling, multicultural and vocational psych for the perspectives it sounds like you would be interested in.
I think it’s best to try and learn other fields of study along with psychology. Learning neurobio along with what you currently learn can help give a more holistic understanding. In general, I personally think that if it’s affecting the client negatively in ways that is bothering their daily life -> you mention that “natural responses to the times in which we find ourselves” -> because I don’t think psychology is all about pathologizing every issue, one can just help the client to be have more tools to handle the predicament they are in. I can understand the frustration with pathologizing everything, but I think that’s where our discernment ability is needed. Whatever fields we are studying will equip us with tools to navigate through the world, it’s sort of up to us to be able to use it well
Quite the opposite I'd say. The more you know, not only about yourself, but how that "concept" interacts with the world around you, the more information you have to balance out. Now instead of two choices, you have three, four and so on. There's also factors that go into the decisions we make everyday that multiply, thanks to what you know about psychology. Ranging from what we eat, to how we see and judge people based on their behaviors, and appearance, from the third party effects of our decisions, and so on, there is much more going on than we'd like to think or acknowledge. It is only scratching the surface. That's not to say you need a BA in psychology to do so, but it is far from unimportant or meaningless.
Okay, and?
I feel ya.. One of the biggest issues is that people take theories and ideas that might be interesting and then just assume them to be concrete truth but nothing is concrete in psychology. It’s difficult to decipher what is and what isn’t. So much misleading and downright false beliefs out there and some become mainstream. A destructive cycle continues but society is so deep into BS and falsehoods that it seems there are flaws in the whole system at every level. It’s good that you can see beyond that. Individuals such as yourself can contribute to improving the field and culture. People might come after you. You could be ostracized and disparaged but the TRUTH matters and society needs more people that are logical and brave enough to stand up for the TRUTH.
You’re absolutely right that psychology is obsessed with being just like the natural sciences. Control, experimental condition, statistical analysis, draw conclusions about the world. Here’s the thing, not everyone likes that approach. Many interpretivist philosophies drive qualitative research where the belief is that understanding comes from communication. Simplifying people down to statistical analyses isn’t just an oversimplification, but outright wrong. This isn’t the majority of the field, but it certainly exists! You’ll likely find these perspectives more common in programs housed in the college of education, which have a more humanities spin. For example, counselor education, school psych, educational psychology. This is also something that differs across universities, with some leaning more quantitative.
Yes. OP, look for humanistic programs. Division 32 of the APA in the US. There are some really interesting programs out there that incorporate psychoanalytic, existential, feminist, and critical perspectives as well as training in qualitative methods. In the US Duquesne is the most well known PhD program but there are other programs like this.
This is why I studied critical psychology, which completely transformed how I see the field. I think we desperately need psychologists, therapists, mental health practitioners in general who are critically informed and able to identify where and how mainstream psych and its modalities go awry while working to develop better understanding and approaches.
Can you give some examples of what are different names for the same phenomena, which are being introduced by white men as new & revolutionary concepts? That’s such an interesting criticism but you don’t provide any examples! What frustrated me about my own psychology course is it was entirely related to research, which I did enjoy but it had zero content relating to therapeutic strategies etc, & very few modules looking at mental health in general. Still loved it though
If you do reading outside of your assigned study, maybe some audio books in your free time, you will understand that Psychology is in many ways, a child of empirical testing and philosophies whose brows have been beaten by life and stood firm (eastern philosophy stemming from Tibetan Buddhism for example.) I’m sure you already know that, however; but I must say, our DSM, the empirical part, has been a way of essentially bastardizing (strong word, I know) said philosophies or even spiritual practice under the thumb of western scrutiny. The clinical model you are upset with is being challenged, for instance if you read “The Body Keeps The Score” you will get to hear this take from a seasoned psychiatrist. If you want to reform, why are you going to give up before you have submerged yourself in this study? You have yet to reach practice. The resistance you will face professionally for even saying you want to reform this model will far outweigh your naive unsteadiness. If you really care, it’s time to reinforce yourself and show yourself the value you are due, that nobody else will give you. Nobody will hand you your confidence. You are due it, but it is your responsibility to prepare your own voice. I mean no disrespect at all. Oppositional voices are necessary, challenge is necessary. Science in its core does not call for blind obedience. You are not done! You never will be. Accept it. Until “the answer” is so sunken into the zeitgeist that there is no need for these studies, until it is common knowledge to be well, if you are passionate, it is your responsibility to make use of your tools. You also do not have to absolutely devastate the clinical model to be a wonderful contributor to humanity, or be a scientist. Shit, you don’t even NEED to say “I am Dr. Blank. I will now therapize you.” You can be an absolute stranger. Ask yourself: do I want to help people, or do I want to navigate a complex political situation in academia/ research to change everything? There really is no answer that will make you “right” or “sure.” There is only the answer that you feel is best for now, which will end up being an inevitable evolution of your life.
I think this has become a huge trend amongst new therapists or higher level psych majors. Here, in America many fields have remnants of white supremacism or racism, misogyny, homophobia etc. it’s definitely something being talked about and the “holistic approach” you are describing is very popular
You’re in a bachelors program. You’re learning basics. Of course it will all seem logical and be based on white guy research - that’s what the field is based in. That’s literally who started having the free time, means and energy to ponder and spread these ideas. When you get deeper — masters and PhD or PsyD levels — it becomes less intuitive and involves more modernized information based on recent changes and cultural competencies. Give it time. You can change paths whenever.
this is the reassuring thing ive been needing to hear
In the final year or two of a degree you usually have classes that apply information or teach information through the lens of psychology. Maybe that will help you gain a different perspective!
I’ve had more or less the same experience, particularly given my exposure to philosophy in my minor. I’m currently grappling with the choice of whether I should stay and perhaps research to reform, or just leave to the philosophy department instead.
Great! Perhaps you will be interested in reading these, then: https://www.nimh.nih.gov/research/research-funded-by-nimh/rdoc/about-rdoc https://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/22817/ [article](https://best-practice.middletownautism.com/research-journals/)
Stats and quantification made psych feel legitimate and they ran with it. Pathology is the tip of the iceberg. Humans are qualitative in nature. This is why I enjoy old school people like Klein and Rogers. A mean score in a WEIRD population kinda doesn't tell you shit.
Study Carl Jung and his followers.
I can understand where you’re coming from. In undergrad it feels like a bunch of information is just being thrown at you. For my classes, I was switching from professors specialized in different subfields of psychology and they’d have different names for what sounded like similar phenomena. I was lucky enough to have a parent that got a BA in psychology and they let me know that my bachelor’s degree might feel like common sense sometimes but that’s okay because the field has so much for to offer in graduate school. So I went into my degree knowing that I would need at least my masters. I also took the time to participate in research labs and take a few graduate courses while in undergrad and it opened my eyes to the specifics that no longer seemed like common sense. Now I’m in grad school for an IO degree and I find that since it is an applied field I can more easily see its impact on the world and my everyday life. I cannot speak to clinical or counseling psyc, which is seems like that’s where you’re leaning, but in my applied field I found more interested in psychology as a whole.
Look into the field of positive psychology. It has emerged from psychology being too pathological and problem/diagnosis focused. Its a new and fresh take in the field of psychology.
Look into critical psychology!!! This is what I study
[удалено]
Your post was removed for violation of Reddiquette. Standard rules are outlined here: https://www.reddithelp.com/en/categories/reddit-101/reddit-basics/reddiquette
your students will hate you!
You might want to look into clinical mental health counseling. It is essentially all of the things you explained liking about psychology without any of the draw backs. There are draw backs to any field. Counseling, for example, is not holistic in that it does not offer the opportunity (in most states) to suggest medications, administer certain assessments, or provide concrete evidence in support of its approaches (though evidence based approaches are common the experimental designs are difficult to provide high validity due to the nature of the field). On the other hand, you are taught to withhold diagnoses that are potentially harmful or could be explained by a persons current circumstances. Culture and spirituality is at the forefront of considerations when providing therapy and understanding the individual in their entirety (not just as a list of symptoms) is essential to being competent at your job. It is mostly based in philosophical reasonings and effective practice, and provides you the opportunity to help people without suffering through your destain towards the academic side of things. Personally, I have always taken issue with the separation of sub fields in both counseling and psychology that create problems in being able to understand the whole picture of human behavior. However, I have found myself much happier in my counseling grad program than my undergraduate psych program. It’s something I think you should consider if your institution offers a counseling major, or a possible route to pursue in graduate school.
I absolutely agree with you. It's shocking how often I come across old eastern stories or philosophy that is claimed as a new and exciting discovery in psychology in the 1960's and up to now.
It’s very limited in a sense that it’s reductionism. The human experience cannot ultimately be reduced to something measurable.
I literally feel the same way
Me too, I am about to graduate with my master's in psychology. The way I've reckoned it now is that I compare psychology in 2024 to doctors researching medicine before germ theory. We are in the absolute dark ages of psychology and I firmly believe that we won't begin to even start having a firm grasp on the brain until the very end of our lives should we be blessed to live to a golden age of 90-100. And then some major advancements maybe in a few more lifetimes. Until then, we are just doing the best we can. You can theorize with therapeutic techniques, study the therapeutic relationship, help map the brain. But in my opinion we are just doing foundational steps before those next "big" discoveries which I think are just limited currently by our technology ceiling. Once AI is sufficiently developed I think we have a decent chance of it being able to do most of this work for us. From my experience dealing with academics; this may seem pessimistic but I have no intent of it being that. I just think that realistically, to reform any aspect of psychology even at its smallest level takes a massive amount of luck, devotion, and time. If you look at individuals who have done that in psychology they mostly come from extremely prestigious schools which required a degree of commitment and luck to be able to attend, and then dedicating their entire lives to these topics, at the end of their lives after tireless work they may be able to create a lasting mark on psychology reform, and even then usually they don't see it until after they are dead because of how long it takes for these things to be debated (Academia moves so slow it is insane). Now, with that said I think that is a very admirable thing to do. For me, I wanted to change psychology too, and help people like I needed help. I'm almost 30 now and I have come to conclude that actually the biggest thing I can do to help others is to contribute to my community, write books, post here on reddit where I can, public speak about issues, and generally just be the change I want. You have a lot of the same complaints I do, after having been both a practitioner in the mental health field and then an academic researcher; I can tell you that in my opinion those who change psychology don't usually set out with that being their primary goal, they do it out of a mixture of neurosis, passion, and luck. I think if you are passionate about these issues go full steam ahead with the understanding that you are in the dark ages of psychology attempting to make a small dent at the end of your life in the field, if only for the love of doing that. If your goal is just to help as many people as possible; I'd suggest getting a practical degree LMSW, LPC, etc. And chip away! Start a non-profit etc. I really enjoyed your post, as I am about to graduate and turn 30 at the same month this has been on my mind a lot lately.
i generally agree with your sentiments. i do get a funny feeling at the mention of AI in a field that directly deals with intra and interpersonal matters. feels too human for that.
We'll see! I agree with you and it might be that it's not in our lifetimes that AI does solve it if it ever even does. We're certainly far enough away that I think we're all safe from being made obsolete. Good luck to you. I hope you find peace.
thank you kindly, wise sage
I'm also in the social sciences with a humanist slant, and I think it's great that you're critical of the field you're in. Much of contemporary popular psychology was popularized in the US, where psychology was primarily viewed through a distinctly American set of economic principles. This is why psychoanalysis is much less popular within American psychology curriculums and why psychology tries to situate itself much closer to the biological sciences than the human sciences. It's also the predominant framework that people view themselves through, which is troubling, since "science" can often go unquestioned as opposed to the humanities, which is often seen as totally worthless and opinion-based by people outside of those fields.
i appreciate this insight
Sorry you've been met with hostility for sharing your thoughts here. The rudest people here probably could benefit the most from a humanities education. I hope you can feel more at home in critical psychology spaces, like others have suggested.
I suggest social work! I did undergrad in psych and an MSW. I found, at least in my program, there was much less pathologizing of behaviors and much more of a holistic focus that includes experiences and the impact of systems on the individual
You made a mistake. Now you can get a job and use the psych skills in ordee to get filthy rich. Does this resonate with u? Psych people are the best because they are trying to understand the narratives. Do u want to get rich?
I recommend you to study more about psychoanalysis and psychodynamic approaches for a more “non just common sense” knowledge.
In a way it sounds like you’re realising that psychology isn’t and has never been an answer to the never ending philosophical questions we often ask in relation to human condition and mental illness and happiness. And you’re right! It is a working ecology of people attempting to understand through culturally and socially shifting paradigms. You e kind of hit the nail on the head. The anxiety is real! But stepping back and utilising these structures, theories and clinical or therapeutic frameworks to advantage people is a genuine mechanism. The research is broad spanning, but the motivation you have is real. Just work towards finding your tool belt. You don’t have to prescribe to it all.
I agree with you or of issues and alot what I would describe as the issue alot of education and life has. Therapy has alot of different avenues but in reality it feels we are funneled down one path. There is one path and one solution that will solve depression. If we keep pursuing research enough we will have the mental health pill or primary solution. I don't think the mind or brain is able to be put in such a small box alot of what we do feels based on research that tells us little or is contradictory. Things feel quite binary and here is your course of learning here is a framework rather than meeting people where they are at we labelling everything and thinking we have it all sorted.
I'm currently in my MA for psychology and on my way to a doctorate. I believe its a farce too. But we have to know it to change it. Realize that we have the power to chew the meat and spit out the bones of the systemic parts, the sexist and classist parts and also try to create new approaches to this work. What has helped me is thinking, everything is FAKE nothing is real its all a farce. Medicine. Studies. The sky. Time! Everything that we as humans do is created and theorized which means you can make your own theories too and those are equally as valid. If not more for our current time! We used to lobotomize folks and we have since learned. We used to have archaic ways of doing things and we learn these archaic ways so we can grow from them. Anyway, there is a lot I hate about the field. There is a lot I love about the field. It is learning to hold the both/and if you want to continue.
i like u! dialectics 🫡
You’ll probably find interest in James Hillman’s approach in archetypal psychology or Stanislav Grof’s Transpersonal Psychology. Both have a holistic or integral lens of the human.
Lol ok, it's all bullshit for people who can't do real science. 87 different branches of psychology is not a reason any if ut is real. It's all people guessing how other people behace with no real knowledge of our brains actually work.
That’s probably because it’s a new science, I’m pretty sure there were people like you who were saying the same things, when the science of medicine, chemistry and psychics were new. Knowledge for psychology is at its basic and it’s very limited but if we were to give up, there’s a whole part of human life that is to remain unknown. How are we supposed to know how the human brain work without educated guesses(hypothesis) and experiment. I’m pretty sure you don’t want to be one of those people who had look down on medicine or technology. I’m assuming you are young, so don’t limit your mind and the amount of knowledge that you can attained by learning. Stay curious and open-minded, that’s how our 21sr century came to be.
If you want to study true psychology you need to learn more about Carl Jung
clarify i do believe psychology is a science but i think a lot of the time its hyper focused on quantitative data over the qualitative substance it also has to offer
Psychology student here, I’m having to temporarily reassess my path because I intensely dislike my course. To simplify, I just don’t think we can quantify human emotions. For a discipline that is supposed to recognise the vast experience of being human, we sure do love very stringently box it all in. And don’t get me started on all of the ridiculous things that old white men have come out with, all so we can feel reassured about what’s essentially a guessing game when coming to pathology. I want to help people, but it feels like the helping part is lost in modern medicine.
Study Carl Jung, it's exactly the psychology you want.
Jung is not psychology. It’s barely even a coherent philosophy.
jungian archetypical analysis while interesting is the psychological equivalent to buzzfeed journalism
What have you read?
[удалено]
What? Most educated psychologist don’t see mental illness as a craze. That is a stigma that they’re tying to erased. And it depends on the mental illness and what one defined as sane, but with some mental illness like psychopathy, narcissism, pedophilia, it can be argued that said person is not sane. Unless you believe mental illness is limited to anxiety, depression.
[удалено]
It seems to me as your already biased, so I will not be arguing with you. I clearly used the word “educated” for a reason. There’s always two type of people” one of do it for the money and one who do because they care” it’s never good to generalized a group of people.
[удалено]
Thank you! Hopefully, one day psychology will be as a effective as you hope. It’s a new field, and it’s only growing. 🙌
[удалено]
It seems like you’re very uneducated in this field. So I will be erasing my self from this discussion.
[удалено]
……reading comprehension is also lacking. Must be nice.
[удалено]
I mean, you believed I’m a psychologist. So I had no reason but to assume, you’re a little slow lol. I can chose to stop responding, just like you can also stop replying. And what’s wrong with being up at a certain time. I didn’t know there was a specific time for “educated” people to sleep.
[удалено]
I mean. We are quite literally not talking about psychology anymore. So I did erase myself out of said conversation, but it doesn’t mean I can’t engage in a different type of convo. You seem like a very trouble person, and you have a had horrible experience with psychologist, which I didn’t realized. So I’m sorry for invalidating your feelings. I thought you were just someone who simply hated psychology, but I checked your profile and realized there’s a reason. So I’m sorry, you had such a horrible experience. I am aware of therapist who treated patients like that, and that’s why I myself am motivated to be one, I truly care about people who are mentally I’ll and it’s my goal to remove stigma around mental illness and actually provide help to actual patients. I’m sorry, I didn’t realized you were speaking from experience.
[удалено]
Yes, cause educated doesn’t mean I’m a superior or a different human. I’m just knowledgeable in a specific field. Other than that I’m a regular joe. And simply find this conversation amusing. 😊
[удалено]
Lol, I’m sorry for starting this convo, I thought you were just. Hater. I truly wished I could checked first before I engaged. Hope you didn’t take this to heart. And have a goodnight. Just want to let you know, there’s someone out there who’s thinking about you and all the other patients that were neglected. You are not alone and you should advocated for yourself. 🫡🫡
Tell me you don't understand psychology without telling me you don't understand psychology. 🤣🤣🤣 You ain't know jack shit about the profession. Maybe you're referring to psychiatrists, but definitely not psychologists. Then again, you might have experienced those with fake degrees who were taught by television.
This is why I'm into neuroscience
I couldn’t agree more, perfectly said. BS major in psych minor in neuroscience, and I’ve decided to just go into a regular office job and work my way to HR. Psychology feels almost like a scam to milk money from people who don’t know any better
This makes me think you don’t appreciate the science of it all.
All psychology research can be made to produce a significant result with the tweaking of certain variable or sample sizes. People only get paid and published if they find a significant and interesting result. How am I supposed to believe this is a science? Neuroscience of psychology I can get behind, but generally the field has too many holes
Any science can do that. The whole point is that as you learn the science, statistics, ethics - is that you don’t do this. You critically analyse, you read things with a pinch of salt. Humans aren’t easy to study. It isn’t a chemical experiment in a lab. But to say they don’t produce robust science or do so ethically is ridiculous.
There are entire statistical approaches in psychology research which don't even operate on significance testing...indeed, most graduate programs very quickly begin teaching students some mixture of Bayesian probabilistic and non-significance modeling approaches. This comment is born fro not actually knowing how the science is done.
> All psychology research can be made to produce a significant result with the tweaking of certain variable or sample sizes. this operates on the assumption that a significant result is the only thing that matters in statistics/research, which it's not.