(October 12, 2015 at 9:51 pm)jenny1972 Wrote:

(October 12, 2015 at 9:34 pm)SnakeOilWarrior Wrote: The diagnosis of anyone practicing any type of medicine will be based on the science done in their field, not their opinions or personal views. Or, they shouldn't be practicing at all.

the mind cannot be put into a petri dish and studied like doctors can study a virus , diagnosis is based not on science but on interpretation of symptoms and what the psych thinks the problem is just as many will disagree with him as those who agree .

---

(October 12, 2015 at 9:48 pm)Beccs Wrote: What we have for psychology is nearly a century of pretty much consistent diagnosis styles that have helped us categorise many different types of mental illness and have allowed us to treat, quite successfully, though, of course not 100%.

The thing about psychology, like medicine, and like science as a whole, is that we're learning more every time.

but unlike medicine or science , theories involving the mind will continue to be debated - agreed by some and disagreed by just as many each and every new theory that someone invents , its no more scientific than religion is .

People still debate medicine (of which psychology is a discipline) and science.

We know, for instance, that vaccinations work.  But there are still woo artists who fight against it.

(October 12, 2015 at 10:30 pm)SnakeOilWarrior Wrote:

(October 12, 2015 at 9:51 pm)jenny1972 Wrote: the mind cannot be put into a petri dish and studied like doctors can study a virus , diagnosis is based not on science but on interpretation of symptoms and what the psych thinks the problem is just as many will disagree with him as those who agree .

---

but unlike medicine or science , theories involving the mind will continue to be debated - agreed by some and disagreed by just as many each and every new theory that someone invents , its no more scientific than religion is .

You act like no doctor has ever misdiagnosed cancer, heart disease, etc...

That's what second opinions are for.

Or, you can just go ahead with your theory bullshit idea that a doctor who is predisposed to a particular idea (religious psychiatrist) is better able to provide an unbiased diagnosis.

isnt atheism being predisposed to a particular idea also they exclude any possibility of God ... the only unbiased view is someone who is open to all possibilities but not particularily for or against . which wouldnt be an atheist or theist  . if a psych cant be unbiased i would rather them knowledgeable to the fact that God exists.

yes a doctor without full knowledge of a disease might misdiagnose something thats why people should seek out knowledgeable doctors and psychiatrists so that they wont be misdiagnosed thank you for further clarifying the point i was trying to make and yes getting a second opinion from a more educated doctor is a great idea .

You clearly have no clue what atheism is

(October 12, 2015 at 10:48 pm)jenny1972 Wrote:

(October 12, 2015 at 10:30 pm)SnakeOilWarrior Wrote: You act like no doctor has ever misdiagnosed cancer, heart disease, etc...

That's what second opinions are for.

Or, you can just go ahead with your theory bullshit idea that a doctor who is predisposed to a particular idea (religious psychiatrist) is better able to provide an unbiased diagnosis.

isnt atheism being predisposed to a particular idea also they exclude any possibility of God ... the only unbiased view is someone who is open to all possibilities but not particularily for or against . which wouldnt be an atheist or theist  . if a psych cant be unbiased i would rather them knowledgeable to the fact that God exists.

Atheism, to me, is simply a non belief in deities.

Most atheists I know do not make the definitive claim that there is/are no god/gods.

Most are open to evidence but have a standard of evidence that most theists don't seem to want to try.  For instance, we always hear personal testimonies.  Such evidence is only such to those who have had such personal experiences.  Not to the rest of us.

(October 12, 2015 at 9:13 pm)jenny1972 Wrote:

(October 12, 2015 at 9:06 pm)Losty Wrote: No it is not. A medical diagnosis is based on medical knowledge. Otherwise anyone could be a doctor

were not talking about a medical doctor whos diagnosis is based on established science were talking about psychiatrists who treat the mind and thats not based on science its only based on opinions of the psychiatrists and what unscientific theories that they believe in .

Psychiatrists have to earn a Medical Doctor degree, and the AFTER THAT they can specialize in psychiatry.

(October 12, 2015 at 9:31 pm)jenny1972 Wrote:

(October 12, 2015 at 9:00 pm)Evie Wrote: For you to know thoughts are not your own they would have to be sufficiently different. If they are sufficiently different they are no longer thoughts anymore so the whole concept is a fucking mess. How can you hear thoughts in YOUR head and say "Oh these thoughts in my head are not my thoughts they are from God"?! They're in your HEAD heard as THOUGHTS that makes them nothing to do with God who is fucking unfalsifiable B.S you can't disprove anyway!

(Not actually angry just passionate, hope I haven't offended you at all Jenny, no harm done).

its ok you just dont understand . yes they are sufficiently different in form and substance they are completely different . why wouldnt they be thoughts anymore just because they are different ? its not a mess , theyre thoughts that my mind does not recognize as being produced from within my mind . I dont really consider thoughts to be something you can " hear " hearing is for audible sound that your ears pick up ... and i have no idea what you mean by  " They're in your HEAD heard as THOUGHTS that makes them nothing to do with God who is fucking unfalsifiable B.S you can't disprove anyway! "  ... im guessing that you meant to say that i cant 'prove anyway!' ... yes i already said i cant prove it to you if God appeared before you youd probabally just go to a psychiatrist and get on meds or think it was all your imagination or you were dreaming exc. your the last person i could convince .

Hi Orchid.  Welcome back.

Jenny Wrote:its ok you just dont understand .

Only when your statements make no sense.

Quote:yes they are sufficiently different in form and substance they are completely different . why wouldnt they be thoughts anymore just because they are different ?

What I mean is if they are thoughts then they are like other thoughts and there is nothing to make you think they are Godly.

Quote: its not a mess , theyre thoughts that my mind does not recognize as being produced from within my mind .

If your mind doesn't recognize them as being produced by the mind then that's just another way of saying that you don't really recognize them to be thoughts.

Quote: I dont really consider thoughts to be something you can " hear " hearing is for audible sound that your ears pick up ...

You know what I meant. Thoughts can be "heard" in your head in the sense that you can remember thoughts but then also construct and hear more original thoughts in the same sort of "heard" way.

Quote: and i have no idea what you mean by  " They're in your HEAD heard as THOUGHTS that makes them nothing to do with God who is fucking unfalsifiable B.S you can't disprove anyway! "  ... im guessing that you meant to say that i cant 'prove anyway!'

No I meant what I said. You can't prove God either, but I was speaking of how you can't disprove him because I was speaking of unfalsifiability.

Quote: ... yes i already said i cant prove it to you if God appeared before you youd probabally just go to a psychiatrist and get on meds or think it was all your imagination or you were dreaming exc. your the last person i could convince .

You wouldn't really convince anyone who wasn't already predisposed to this B.S because you're not making any cogent arguments you're just spouting a load of horseshit (or H.S) about how you know certain thoughts are from God and I should question whether when I had an auditory hallucination once whether that was God speaking to me.

Even most theists wouldn't listen to you saying that you get thoughts from God and I should take the voices I heard to possibly be God speaking to me.

(October 12, 2015 at 11:03 pm)drfuzzy Wrote:

(October 12, 2015 at 9:13 pm)jenny1972 Wrote: were not talking about a medical doctor whos diagnosis is based on established science were talking about psychiatrists who treat the mind and thats not based on science its only based on opinions of the psychiatrists and what unscientific theories that they believe in .

Psychiatrists have to earn a Medical Doctor degree, and the AFTER THAT they can specialize in psychiatry.

and if they specialized in the body instead of the intangible mind they could arrive at diagnosis that was based on science and not their own opinion . a diagnosis is only as good as the opinion of the psych who gives it not all are equal .

(October 12, 2015 at 11:03 pm)drfuzzy Wrote:

(October 12, 2015 at 9:13 pm)jenny1972 Wrote: were not talking about a medical doctor whos diagnosis is based on established science were talking about psychiatrists who treat the mind and thats not based on science its only based on opinions of the psychiatrists and what unscientific theories that they believe in .

Psychiatrists have to earn a Medical Doctor degree, and the AFTER THAT they can specialize in psychiatry.

Just don't trust a shrink to perform surgery.

"I'm about to cut you open.  Tell me how you feel about that."

'Evidence' is a derivation of 'evident'. Personal testimonies aren't evident to anyone but the person/people who experienced it, and eyewitness testimony is almost always flawed due to our psychology. We forget, embellish, transpose, misunderstand, etc. all the time. So personal encounters/relationships are utterly meaningless to those outside of the experience, and likely based on flawed recollection to boot.

And, yes, many (most?) atheists are open to the possibility of a god. The thing is, for evidence of this god to be considered valid, it cannot be something that can be considered evidence of something else. And it must be tangible, measurable, and testable. Assertions alone don't cut it.

And that's why we don't believe in any religion we've encountered to date. The divine is nothing more than assertions via hearsay with nothing to back it up.