Author Topic: Molyneux bravery? Debate history?  (Read 733 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Faith

  • FDR Aware
  • **
  • Posts: 65
  • Respect: +14
Re: Molyneux bravery? Debate history?
« Reply #15 on: August 28, 2018, 07:20:33 PM »
0
It was a researcher from UBC who , while doing a study of violent criminals in the prison system, discovered that most had brain damage in certain areas of their brains (the areas responsible for empathy). Scientist's have since learned (by using brain scans)that many sociopaths have damage to this area.

It's sad because these people are considered incurable (though of course not all people with this damage are violent or are criminals )

Reading fiction can't repair the brain, obviously, but I could see that it could help certain people to increase their empathy levels to a degree.

I can't remember the name of the researcher who did this study, but I read his book about the study and about his scary experiences of interviewing these criminals.

QuestEon

  • Just some guy with a blog.
  • Administrator
  • FDR Wizard
  • *****
  • Posts: 851
  • What's your opinion? I'd love to hear it!
  • Respect: +451
    • FDR Liberated
Re: Molyneux bravery? Debate history?
« Reply #16 on: August 28, 2018, 09:00:08 PM »
+2
"He was talking once to a crackpot (but actually educated) therapist named Daniel Mackler."

Wow, what's with the shade-throwing? Mackler is a disciple of Alice Miller, he's not a crackpot. Geeze.


I'm sorry--I just have to call them as I see them. Molyneux is a disciple of Alice Miller, too, but that doesn't say anything about his fitness to give advice.

In addition, as popular as Alice Miller may be in some circles, its important to remember that all of her publications were her opinion, with no actual clinical data to back it up. That's one of the reasons her work has never been adopted by the scientific community. I'm not saying she was wrong, by any means, but people who build on her work and take it a step further (like Mackler) can get into trouble pretty quickly. They are just spouting opinions at that point.

In the brief Mackler video on the link below, he indicts most other therapists because (in his view) they don't show their patients how to confront their feelings but instead to dissociate from them. Where is the evidence for this claim?

He also says that all therapists with children are suspect because they have committed the same crimes on their children that were inflicted on their patients. He says they are part of a "fraternity of parents" who can't handle sitting with their patients hearing those crimes. Where in the WORLD is the evidence for that?

Daniel Mackler and the evil fraternity of parents

It's the same kind of black-and-white "splitting" thinking that Molyneux is nearly always guilty of. I don't think Mackler has any idea of what "most" of the thousands of practicing therapists--whether they are parents or not--do or think.

Because the discussion is now completely subjective, you can tell me I'm wrong and it's OK. I just have a different opinion.
It isn't about winning the debate. It's about the truth.

The Observer

  • FDR Authority
  • ****
  • Posts: 258
  • Respect: +136
Re: Molyneux bravery? Debate history?
« Reply #17 on: August 29, 2018, 04:39:30 PM »
0
He admitted this on one of his videos about year ago.  It was implied he doesn't care all that much about the truth when comes to debates.  He said "I'm going to use every trick in the book... " or something along those lines.

In NOT AN ARGUMENT (youtube) Molyneux says:

“I’m going to use every trick in the book to make my case, if you don’t like that I guess you have to up your game now, don’t you, if you identify my tricks and counteract them, but you know . . . “ 

Oh wow, I had forgotten about how awful this video is.  By simply making that video, Molyneux proved how much he was shaken by that debate with Derek.  It is a weaselly video.   Also, the comments below this video show exactly how poorly this came off.  The same thing happened with the Fritz caller. Molyneux went on and on about it and how "it didn't bother him..."   ;D 

Excultmember90

  • FDR Interested
  • *
  • Posts: 47
  • Respect: +23
Re: Molyneux bravery? Debate history?
« Reply #18 on: August 29, 2018, 11:26:26 PM »
0
Sorry I haven't been more active in this thread I started but I got very busy recently.  I just wanted to add that I did read through it and appreciate the replies and discussions and I have learned a bit and have more to glean from as I continue my next video project.

-Excult

Hierophant

  • FDR Aware
  • **
  • Posts: 77
  • Respect: +25
Re: Molyneux bravery? Debate history?
« Reply #19 on: August 31, 2018, 08:13:02 AM »
0
"Molyneux is a disciple of Alice Miller"

???

Can't tell if you're doing subtle trolling or if you're really that far gone. Just to be clear, Molyneux is definitely NOT a psychologist, and he's not advocating being on the side of the child. He's a demagogue who is on anyone's side as long as they give him money.
« Last Edit: August 31, 2018, 08:14:35 AM by Hierophant »

QuestEon

  • Just some guy with a blog.
  • Administrator
  • FDR Wizard
  • *****
  • Posts: 851
  • What's your opinion? I'd love to hear it!
  • Respect: +451
    • FDR Liberated
Re: Molyneux bravery? Debate history?
« Reply #20 on: September 06, 2018, 09:57:51 PM »
0
LOL! No, not trolling and not subtle. I simply took your comment as an argument:

"Mackler is a disciple of Alice Miller, he's not a crackpot."

You probably didn't mean it as an argument. If you did, it is insufficient, which is why I referenced Molyneux. Actually, Molyneux DOES believe he is an expert in psychology and CLAIMS that he advocates ONLY on the side of the child.

Of course neither of us believe that''s what truly drives him!

My actual point was very simple. Any "follower" of Alice Miller or someone "taking Alice Miller to the next level"; e.g., Mackler, is simply throwing their own opinions on top of hers. It's not science--just people making stuff up.
It isn't about winning the debate. It's about the truth.