Talk:Fringe Psychology

Mental health: Is it mind over matter? In a sense, yes. But not in every case. Pysical and mind can't be separated. They both have influence on each other. Because of my long term physical health problem, my mental health/depression has triggered. I tried to control my mind not to have that kind of feeling. But can only control for a certain amount. For my case, I found out one thing. It is true for me. It is nothing to use or buy and no side affect. That is to exercise your nerve. How to exercise? It is simple. You sit down on your leg (not in the chair) and squeeze your chest while keeping your head down. Squeeze means the same thing you do when you go to restroom. Try a few times everyday. Don't squeeze too much and a long time. It can cause low blood pressure. It is sound strange. It does work.

Can you find a common thread?
What might be a common thread for this book that we could use to tie it all together and then be used expand upon it? --Remi (talk) 09:18, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Most of this material falls into a category which usually appears in books or chapters as 'themes in psychology' or 'approaches to psychology' or the like. These are more schools of thoughts than 'topics' as the term is commonly used. I think that as an 'Approaches' text it could be useful and relevant. Lord Spring Onion (talk) 00:03, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Material for possible integration
Laing argued that the strange behavior and seemingly confused speech of people undergoing a psychotic episode were ultimately understandable as an attempt to communicate worries and concerns, often in situations where this was not possible or not permitted. Laing stressed the role of society, and particularly the family, in the development of "madness" (his term). He argued that individuals can often be put in impossible situations, where they are unable to conform to the conflicting expectations of their peers, leading to a 'lose-lose situation' and immense mental distress for the individuals concerned. (In 1956, in Palo Alto, Gregory Bateson and his colleagues Paul Watzlawick, Donald Jackson, and Jay Haley articulated a related theory of schizophrenia as stemming from double bind situations where a person receives different or contradictory messages.) The perceived symptoms of schizophrenia were therefore an expression of this distress, and should be valued as a cathartic and trans-formative experience.

Laing saw psychopathology as being seated not in biological or psychic organs -- whereby environment is relegated to playing at most only an accidental role as immediate trigger of disease (the 'stress diathasis model' of the nature and causes of psychopathology) -- but rather in the social cradle, the urban home, which cultivates it, the very crucible in which selves are forged. This re-evaluation of the locus of the disease process-- and consequent shift in forms of treatment-- was, indeed still is, perhaps now more than ever, in stark contrast to psychiatric orthodoxy (in the broadest sense we have of ourselves as psychological subjects and pathological selves). Psychiatrist and philosopher Karl Jaspers had previously pronounced, in his seminal work General Psychopathology, that many of the symptoms of mental illness (and particularly of delusions) were 'un-understandable', and therefore were worthy of little consideration except as a sign of some other underlying primary disorder. Laing was revolutionary in valuing the content of psychotic behavior and speech as a valid expression of distress, albeit wrapped in an enigmatic language of personal symbolism which is meaningful only from within their situation. According to Laing, if a therapist can better understand his or her patient, the therapist can begin to make sense of the symbolism of the patient's psychosis, and therefore start addressing the concerns which are the root cause of the distress.

Laing never denied the existence of mental illness, but simply viewed it in a radically different light from his contemporaries. For Laing, mental illness could be a trans-formative episode whereby the process of undergoing mental distress was compared to a shamanic journey. The traveler could return from the journey with important insights, and may even have become a wiser and more grounded person as a result. 

There is already an entry for Laing in Wikipedia. (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R._D._Laing ). There it is noted that his ideas are not part of mainstream Psychology. A series on Topics in Psychology should mostly (not entirely) represent the prevailing view. Ideally this would be accompanied by references to the scientific literature rather than a description of ones personal views and experience. DJM77bci (talk) 00:14, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Nature of the content here
Much of what I see in this section seems to be "fringe Psychology" rather than the mainstream point of view. One would not find this sort of description in a standard textbook of Psychology. DJM77bci (talk) 00:19, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Lead section: what is the point?
The lead section seems to ramble on aimlessly with a potted history of the universe before even mentioning the topic in a general way. What is the point of this? It mentions psychology as one of the things 'not immediately related to survival' - so does this mean that every book about any of the myriad arts or sciences should start out like this? Surely the lead section should summarise what the book is about and define the topic but it does not do this as 'Fringe' psychology is not even mentioned. Smcg8374 (discuss • contribs) 09:01, 28 December 2011 (UTC)