Autism do you believe "high-functioning" autism is real and can you grow out of it

[Steve]

View attachment 48247
It's not science, it's just superstition pretending to be science. I'd define it more as a tool of social control. Since you can change public opinion on a topic based on what the "science" says. A major reason for homosexuality becoming so accepted in the west was due to psychology saying it's actually normal and good. The stupid masses will accept whatever the "experts" say after all.

Interesting case but that is just looking at Psych as how it is used by corrupt leaders, you wouldn't say medicine isn't a science but we all know how the world gov's used it to control the people of the world during 2020 and the Chinese flu hit the world so really every science is prone to corruption by groups who want to influence the general public. I did not study psych myself (engineering major after all) but acting like its not a science at all is obtuse because looking at something that is just superstition like astral signs or horoscope it looks significantly stronger, the field has taught us a lot about the human psyche that was previous unthought of like Freud's theory of the Unconscious Mind (look into this it is big) or the Behaviorism school of thought. Both of these massive ideas were things that we had inklings of thought about but some really bright Psychologists looked into them deeper and taught all of us more about the human mind, which allows doctors and individuals to better examine someone's thoughts by their actions. I will admit that Psychologists are often corrupted like doctors are (the ones who propose ideas the gov doesn't like don't get grants or funding) but writing off the whole field is too far.

 

[nagolbud]

It's vaccine injury. Detox heavy metals from your body and the bad symptoms will go away.
#facts

 

[Aedra]

What's the point supposed to be?

The behaviors associated with mental disorders do exist. But how we see those behaviors changes depending on culture. If I sent you back to 500 years ago, someone might describe such behaviors as the work of satan, or perhaps even the opposite. It was expected among medieval people that saintly people would usually appear foolish. The point is, what exactly gives you the right to claim that psychology is the only way to see the human mind? What proof do you have that all the others like various religious explanations are wrong and you are right? I'd have less of an issue with this if you didn't start with the assumption of being objectively correct in your view.

 

[Soygoy]

The behaviors associated with mental disorders do exist. But how we see those behaviors changes depending on culture. If I sent you back to 500 years ago, someone might describe such behaviors as the work of satan, or perhaps even the opposite. It was expected among medieval people that saintly people would usually appear foolish. The point is, what exactly gives you the right to claim that psychology is the only way to see the human mind? What proof do you have that all the others like various religious explanations are wrong and you are right? I'd have less of an issue with this if you didn't start with the assumption of being objectively correct in your view.

Religion and astrology has no place in the conversation as to whether or not Psychology is real, you cannot say that the supposed word of god declares that it is false. Religion is subjective and what people believe differs from person to person, which makes it somewhat unreliable for determining things if someone believes that their god is real because their god said so compared to the other guy who believes his god is real because his god said so.

But how we see those behaviors changes depending on culture. If I sent you back to 500 years ago, someone might describe such behaviors as the work of satan, or perhaps even the opposite. It was expected among medieval people that saintly people would usually appear foolish.

Medieval times also has no place in this conversation. You're bringing up a lot of unrelated topics, albeit, psychology and science has always been an always evolving field and back then, leaders were corrupt and used their influence to control what people believed. They did not believe that how people acted was satanic because the bible said so, but because their church told them so.

The point is, what exactly gives you the right to claim that psychology is the only way to see the human mind? What proof do you have that all the others like various religious explanations are wrong and you are right? I'd have less of an issue with this if you didn't start with the assumption of being objectively correct in your view.

Religion and science are to be discussed separately. Science has a lot of proof, studying, testing, whereas religion is solely based off of faith. I would like to ask of you if this means that if you believe things in a purely religious perspective that you believe people with autism are the work of satan or something like that?

 

[Aedra]

Religion and astrology has no place in the conversation as to whether or not Psychology is real, you cannot say that the supposed word of god declares that it is false. Religion is subjective and what people believe differs from person to person, which makes it somewhat unreliable for determining things if someone believes that their god is real because their god said so compared to the other guy who believes his god is real because his god said so.


Medieval times also has no place in this conversation. You're bringing up a lot of unrelated topics, albeit, psychology and science has always been an always evolving field and back then, leaders were corrupt and used their influence to control what people believed. They did not believe that how people acted was satanic because the bible said so, but because their church told them so.


Religion and science are to be discussed separately. Science has a lot of proof, studying, testing, whereas religion is solely based off of faith. I would like to ask of you if this means that if you believe things in a purely religious perspective that you believe people with autism are the work of satan or something like that?

It feels like I'm posting on reddit and not the shlog sometimes.

 

[Steve]

Religion is subjective

No, in any rational sect of Christianity the priest/pastor would agree on 98% of things, and every other religion is false so its pretty objective really

erligion is solely based off of faith. I would like to ask of you if this means that if you believe things in a purely religious perspective that you believe people with autism are the work of satan or something like that?

Religion isn't solely based off faith, there is a LOT of archaeological and witness-based evidence towards stuff that happened in the Bible, if it was soley based off faith that would kinda play God as a fool.

 

[terrycrews]

It feels like I'm posting on reddit and not the shlog sometimes.

I do have illnesses that aren't really explainable by "demons"

 

[Soygoy]

Religion and astrology has no place in the conversation as to whether or not Psychology is real, you cannot say that the supposed word of god declares that it is false. Religion is subjective and what people believe differs from person to person, which makes it somewhat unreliable for determining things if someone believes that their god is real because their god said so compared to the other guy who believes his god is real because his god said so.


Medieval times also has no place in this conversation. You're bringing up a lot of unrelated topics, albeit, psychology and science has always been an always evolving field and back then, leaders were corrupt and used their influence to control what people believed. They did not believe that how people acted was satanic because the bible said so, but because their church told them so.


Religion and science are to be discussed separately. Science has a lot of proof, studying, testing, whereas religion is solely based off of faith. I would like to ask of you if this means that if you believe things in a purely religious perspective that you believe people with autism are the work of satan or something like that?

A lot of scientific things are true because they can be tested, experiments can be done by anyone. They're not true because people said so, they're true because you can validate them by yourself. If you really disbelieve that autism is real, you can perform your own testing and experiments. Psychology is the study of the human mind and the behaviours of humans as animals, it's absolutely real and that's why there have been so many studies on how we behave and how we act and what causes that to happen.

No, in any rational sect of Christianity the priest/pastor would agree on 98% of things, and every other religion is false so its pretty objective really

Religion isn't solely based off faith, there is a LOT of archaeological and witness-based evidence towards stuff that happened in the Bible, if it was soley based off faith that would kinda play God as a fool.

So then, Christianity or Islam. Which one is correct?

It feels like I'm posting on reddit and not the shlog sometimes.

I'm not religious, I apologize.

 

[Steve]

So then, Christianity or Islam. Which one is correct?

????? Christianity of course, did I mention Islam? The religion of Islam is literally built on a trust me bro and bends to whatever Muhammed wanted at the time.

 

[Soygoy]

????? Christianity of course, did I mention Islam? The religion of Islam is literally built on a trust me bro and bends to whatever Muhammed wanted at the time.

The same applies to Christianity which is what makes Religion subjective. To claim that what you believe is true while what everyone else believes is false purely because of what your bible says and not based off of any level of testing, i.e attempting to prove the existence of god through experiments, is kind of a fallacy.

 

[Aedra]

I do have illnesses that aren't really explainable by "demons"

Maybe you just don't know yourself well enough.

 

[terrycrews]

Maybe you just don't know yourself well enough.

I'm pretty sure I'm in touch with myself dude

 

[Hagon]

>psychology is fake
>autism isn't real

 

[Spasoje's Revenge]

You could probably upgrade to low functioning autism

 

[Steve]

The same applies to Christianity which is what makes Religion subjective. To claim that what you believe is true while what everyone else believes is false purely because of what your bible says and not based off of any level of testing, i.e attempting to prove the existence of god through experiments, is kind of a fallacy.

Bro no it doesn't Muhammed claimed to be prophesied by a comment made by Jesus which can't be found anywhere in history except the Quran, as opposed to Jesus who was prophesied a bunch of times (one example) in the Old Testament.

 

[Soygoy]

Bro no it doesn't Muhammed claimed to be prophesied by a comment made by Jesus which can't be found anywhere in history except the Quran, as opposed to Jesus who was prophesied a bunch of times (one example) in the Old Testament.

In the mind of muslims, the same could be said. Christianity is all gobbledy gook, the Quran is actually the truth. Same could be said for any other religion.

No, in any rational sect of Christianity the priest/pastor would agree on 98% of things, and every other religion is false so its pretty objective really

Religion isn't solely based off faith, there is a LOT of archaeological and witness-based evidence towards stuff that happened in the Bible, if it was soley based off faith that would kinda play God as a fool.

Before this conversation gets derailed I should say that this is not about which religion is correct or incorrect but about the existence of Psychology, which unfortunately has been tainted by the idea that religious beliefs hold more value than science. To me this causes a fair bit of conflict because it just devolves into a religion vs science argument, many scientists and psychologists are and have been religious however, but the main source of conflict arises from faith and belief.

Science is rigorously tested, experiments can be performed and psychology is real, that is unless you are religious, in which good things happen to you because you're a good person and god likes you and everyone you dislike is the work of satan, whereas in psychology, benefactors like a person's upbringing or relationship with others are the cause for their poor behaviour, not satan, the universal boogeyman.

When it gets like this and people start bringing up Christianity and then claiming it to be the truth, theres a lot of errors in what people say, because their only proof is "Everyone else says this, god says this and my bible says this, so it's true." but to those people, suddenly science is false, even though a large number of people also agree that science is correct? So what makes religion more right than science? In my opinion, Science is more correct because of the everyday studies and analysis' you can perform, the laws of physics come to mind.

 

[Soygoy]

In the mind of muslims, the same could be said. Christianity is all gobbledy gook, the Quran is actually the truth. Same could be said for any other religion.

Before this conversation gets derailed I should say that this is not about which religion is correct or incorrect but about the existence of Psychology, which unfortunately has been tainted by the idea that religious beliefs hold more value than science. To me this causes a fair bit of conflict because it just devolves into a religion vs science argument, many scientists and psychologists are and have been religious however, but the main source of conflict arises from faith and belief.

Science is rigorously tested, experiments can be performed and psychology is real, that is unless you are religious, in which good things happen to you because you're a good person and god likes you and everyone you dislike is the work of satan, whereas in psychology, benefactors like a person's upbringing or relationship with others are the cause for their poor behaviour, not satan, the universal boogeyman.

When it gets like this and people start bringing up Christianity and then claiming it to be the truth, theres a lot of errors in what people say, because their only proof is "Everyone else says this, god says this and my bible says this, so it's true." but to those people, suddenly science is false, even though a large number of people also agree that science is correct? So what makes religion more right than science? In my opinion, Science is more correct because of the everyday studies and analysis' you can perform, the laws of physics come to mind.

To people who are religious, are there any tests that I can do to confirm the existence of God or Jesus by myself? I've tried praying, but nothing happens.

 

[terrycrews]

To people who are religious, are there any tests that I can do to confirm the existence of God or Jesus by myself? I've tried praying, but nothing happens.

The whole point is that it's a fucking faith you moron he explicitly says there will be no more explicit signs in the Bible

 

[Spasoje's Revenge]

In the mind of muslims, the same could be said. Christianity is all gobbledy gook, the Quran is actually the truth. Same could be said for any other religion.

>if you look at the truth from the perspective of people who are wrong, it seems wrong, so you can't claim it's true

 

[Soygoy]

The whole point is that it's a fucking faith you moron he explicitly says there will be no more explicit signs in the Bible

Which is what makes it unreliable, whereas Psychology is not faith, it can be tested. It is a science, experiments can be performed and an outcome can be reached, these experiments are then confirmed by more and more experiments and if the overwhelming majority come to the same conclusion, then we have our answer. I see no reason as to why Psychology, being the study of the mind and human behaviour, is false and superstition, but religion is true, despite it also potentially being superstition.

There are many psychological experiments you can do at home, especially with other animals, like dogs for example, which can be trained and conditioned to do things based off of their perceptions in our behaviour, like saying a certain word or phrase when we take them out for walks or feed them. Would the religious explanation for this be that everything a dog does, does so because of Jesus or Satan? I'm confused on how Christianity is supposed to operate in the field of science, is it "Gravity because God said so, Earth round because God said so and the pentatonic scale because god said so" or is there something else that I'm missing?

Seems like a pretty silly debate to be honest. It's like being a programmer, instead of having defined logical functions which can be tested and get the same result, you have to use pray() and 99% of the time nothing happens except for the 1% where something does happen due to coincidence but you blame it on God or Satan, I mean hey maybe Religion is a good thing, you can blame Judas for all your worries, maybe I can even blame Satan for creating normal people or something like that.