(October 4, 2021 at 10:46 pm)Ghetto Sheldon Wrote:

(October 4, 2021 at 9:51 pm)vulcanlogician Wrote: The requirements for licensure as a dementia therapist, though they may vary from state to state, are no joke. Years of experience in a medical field, and a four year degree (in anything). You also have to attend a seminar. Not sure how long the seminar is. Could be one day. Could be 500 hours. That's all fine and good. And I'm sure you are qualified to practice your profession.

But this qualification doesn't necessarily translate to an expertise in cognitive science. You are likely only required to learn the bits of cognitive psychology that pertain to your practice, with (I'm sure) some more general instruction also heaped on.

A masters degree in cognitive science or psychology would do more to suggest expertise. And even THEN... in a hypothetical world where you had a masters degree in cog psy... you've still only made statements of authority up to this point. Something tells me if you actually had a master's degree, you'd not do that. You'd say [this idea] is wrong because of x (which is empirically supported in cognitive studies). You have provided less than a teaspoonful of substance in all your posts combined.

So-- no-- you're relevant credentials are not standing on their own. And even if you had relevant credentials, you're not properly engaging in argument. That's something you'd learn in grad school... how to argue an original thesis using a proper methodology.

I don't debate nor argue my licensed scope of practice 
Either you're receptive to a consult  as I elaborate on my position 
or you're excused

*raises hand*


Who the fuck do you think you are, exactly?


Thanks in advance.

(October 5, 2021 at 12:25 am)Rahn127 Wrote: Ghetto - Should you have any questions in the future, many of us would be glad to help you understand any difficult topics or subjects that you might show interest in.

You seem to have some difficulty with conversation in general.
We can talk about how normal conversations are usually handled, if this would help you.

Hi Sheldon, My name is Rahn. I am 56 years old. In my day job, I work construction and build new homes, room additions and do interior remodeling, usually a kitchen or bathroom. I am also an author of two books. Both are fiction and any day now I will be famous and wealthy. (LOL) I have been an atheist all of my life. Never bought into any of the religious stuff. I have one son and three grandchildren. My life is good, but like most things, it could always be better.

If you would like, please tell me about yourself.

HI!    Im an atheist who  confronts the entire arena of online debating, logic loving   atheists.    When atheists hold theists up to elite standards of logic and then refuse to even consider the elite standards of relevant science & medicine,  then atheists are corrupted.    The way I see it, if atheists can dish it out,  they can take it.
The life threatening atrocities of religiosity warrant our fines efforts and fight club logic up a theist's ass is not our finest.  
When atheists argue against doing science to offer our finest to theists,  then atheists are as corrupted as the YECs they confront. 
IF my approach is that important,  then we need to redecorate Graham's hierarchy & put approach on top.  
IF you want to  be an asset,  please learn my position & then redecorate  my vernacular into lay person speak.  
I have a sophisticated proposition:  to create a comprehensive approach towards the delusional by doing the R&D we need for modeling after the approach used in real life nationwide in Murika. 
Personally,  I live in New Mexico, the Land of Enchantment.    I love it here.   I cook, clean, shop at wal mart, watch my soap & smoke a lot of pot.
I have Aspergers.  Wired /not stupid.  I kinda am for real Ghetto Sheldon

As a pretend clinician or therapist, I assume you know that god belief and religiosity in general aren't considered to be delusional, right?

(October 5, 2021 at 1:27 am)The Grand Nudger Wrote: As a pretend clinician or therapist, I assume you know that god belief and religiosity in general aren't considered to be delusional, right?

Do you have evidence to support your claims?

---

(October 5, 2021 at 12:34 am)LadyForCamus Wrote:

(October 4, 2021 at 10:46 pm)Ghetto Sheldon Wrote: I don't debate nor argue my licensed scope of practice 
Either you're receptive to a consult  as I elaborate on my position 
or you're excused

*raises hand*


Who the fuck do you think you are, exactly?


Thanks in advance.

The mountains of evidence behind my scope of practice stands regardless of what I think I am.

(October 5, 2021 at 1:31 am)Ghetto Sheldon Wrote:

(October 5, 2021 at 1:27 am)The Grand Nudger Wrote: As a pretend clinician or therapist, I assume you know that god belief and religiosity in general aren't considered to be delusional, right?

Do you have evidence to support your claims?

Quote:the current DSM-IV definition of delusion exempts religious doctrine from pathology altogether

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15990520/

It would seem that you'd have to start there...changing the current standards to reflect your position, rather than bitching about atheists on a message board handling largely academic questions about good or bad arguments as offered by the religious. No one comes here to deprogram nutballs. Not our jobs. Not yours, either, which is a good thing for everyone involved.

(October 5, 2021 at 1:36 am)The Grand Nudger Wrote:

(October 5, 2021 at 1:31 am)Ghetto Sheldon Wrote: Do you have evidence to support your claims?

Quote:the current DSM-IV definition of delusion exempts religious doctrine from pathology altogether

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15990520/

It would seem that you'd have to start there...changing the current standards to reflect your position, rather than bitching about atheists on a message board.[/font][/size][/color

God is a pathological delusion ppl have been wired for since cave dude days.  Religion is a sociocultural phenomena.   We need an ICD code so we can bill for treating the worst of the worst such as those who are getting away with state sanctioned murder of their children via religious freedom.
If this is too much of a stretch for you,  then you're ruled out for further discussion as this should be a given

Then there you go..just like I suggested..what you need to do is take your crusade to where it matters. AF doesn't write clinical standards or criminal law. Good luck.

(October 5, 2021 at 1:40 am)Ghetto Sheldon Wrote:

(October 5, 2021 at 1:36 am)The Grand Nudger Wrote: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15990520/

It would seem that you'd have to start there...changing the current standards to reflect your position, rather than bitching about atheists on a message board.[/font][/size][/color

God is a pathological delusion ppl have been wired for since cave dude days.  Religion is a sociocultural phenomena.   We need an ICD code so we can bill for treating the worst of the worst such as those who are getting away with state sanctioned murder of their children via religious freedom.
If this is too much of a stretch for you,  then you're ruled out for further discussion as this should be a given

Christians are exempted from being charged with murdering their children via medical neglect.  That we have no ICD code to lock them up behind glass w/ a doctor's order is not an asset

They're not, and the fact that most parents charged with neglect in the us will..by sheer force of demographics, identify as christian ought to tell you that you're on the wrong track here. Some states are more permissive than others, but at this point you're swirling the drain of a right to refuse care -and- insisting that god beliefs and religion are delusional. That'll be double the work, and none of it can be accomplished here.

(October 5, 2021 at 1:45 am)The Grand Nudger Wrote: They're not, and the fact that most parents charged with neglect in the us will..by sheer force of demographics, identify as christian ought to tell you that you're on the wrong track here.  Some states are more permissive than others, but at this point you're swirling the drain of a right to refuse care -and- insisting that god beliefs and religion are delusional.  That'll be double the work, and none of it can be accomplished here.

As long as you're not focusing on line 3 & 4 of my OP,  you're dodging.