Who are your role models?

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.



King Kandy
I was curious about this. I'm an atheist, so I don't use any holy book as a guide to my life. But nonetheless, I do have people whose lives and teachings, I find highly applicable to myself and try to go by. I'm curious what people other members consider their "role models".

I have a lot of them, but here's a short few:

Richard Feynman
Albert Einstein
Timothy Leary
John Lennon
Ken Kesey
Franklin Roosevelt

theICONiac
Whether you believe in him or not Jesus had a lot of good advice thumbup

King Kandy
In some ways, in some ways I think a lot of his advice is awful. But its not like you are bound to take 100%. Some people, I take lessons from even though they disagree with me on almost everything.

theICONiac
Originally posted by King Kandy
In some ways, in some ways I think a lot of his advice is awful. But its not like you are bound to take 100%. Some people, I take lessons from even though they disagree with me on almost everything.

Out of curiosity what advice did Christ give you feel was awful?

Robtard
Originally posted by theICONiac
Out of curiosity what advice did Christ give you feel was awful?

"Turn the other cheek" can be disastrous at times.

theICONiac
Originally posted by Robtard
"Turn the other cheek" can be disastrous at times.

Only disasterous when one party does not subscribe to the same philosophy smile

theICONiac
Originally posted by King Kandy
I was curious about this. I'm an atheist, so I don't use any holy book as a guide to my life. But nonetheless, I do have people whose lives and teachings, I find highly applicable to myself and try to go by. I'm curious what people other members consider their "role models".

I have a lot of them, but here's a short few:

Richard Feynman
Albert Einstein
Timothy Leary
John Lennon
Ken Kesey
Franklin Roosevelt

Curious about some of your picks...

Einstein? Are you a physicist?

Timothy Leary? Do you follow a similiar lifestyle (which would probably disqualify you from being a physicist wink )

Thoren
God
Jesus
Holy Spirit
The Angels
Santa
The Easter Bunny
Tooth Fairy
And the gay elf who wants to be a dentist

Symmetric Chaos
I'd include Feynman as well. Don't make things too complex, study the things that interest you, understanding breeds appreciation not dismissal, and so on.

Various writers that I've read over the years. Simmons, Banks, Shakespeare. I'd like to be a writer myself.

Skinner. I'm not a radical behaviorist but I do appreciate the desire to put scientific rigor in places that lack it. We can understand things if try to. Also I found this funny picture of him.

I can't say there are any religious or philosophical figures I'm especially enamored of. I like Bentham quite a bit but I find it difficult to support any self consistent sort of utilitarianism.

I don't have a wide enough or deep enough understanding of art, sports, poetry, and the like to have any role models there. All I know is the Old Masters are awesome and anything after Picasso is pointless without including an explanation.

dadudemon
Walter Payton.
My mother.
Jesus Christ.
James (my god-brother).
Rosa Parks.
My Grandfather.
Marie Curie.
And the latest addition:

Stephen Hawking. He may be right, afterall. (The Bet).

inimalist
Originally posted by theICONiac
Timothy Leary? Do you follow a similiar lifestyle (which would probably disqualify you from being a physicist wink )

you know Leary was a world renown psychologist who designed many of the psychiatric tests still in use today?

King Kandy
Originally posted by theICONiac
Einstein? Are you a physicist?

Timothy Leary? Do you follow a similiar lifestyle (which would probably disqualify you from being a physicist wink )
I love science, though I am a chemistry student not a physicist. But I am actually speaking more in reference to the moral/political views espoused by Einstein.

And where's your PhD?

Mindship
Those who immediately come to mind...

My dad
My wife
Leo Bucaglia
Carl Sagan
Superman / Silver Surfer (yeah, I said it)
Any enlightened being in history.

Who used to be on the list: Ah-nuld

Digi
Not easy. I'm tempted to list writers, but enjoying their writing doesn't make them great role models. "Heroes" would have been an easier term to list. Role models implies a certain amount of emulation. I admire Jorge Luis Borges and love his writing, but the dude was chronically depressed and horribly self-deprecating. Not awful qualities, but not ones I'd wish to mimic. Same with, say, Shakespeare. Do I aspire to emulate the man or the characters he created? More of the latter.

With that in mind, this is a fairly rigid list of role models, not including several others I might list as personal heroes.


Snoopy (yes, really)
Joseph Campbell
Walt Whitman
Michael Shermer
Doctor Who
My brother
Two friends of mine, both named John. But I realize anonymous people aren't as relevant to KMC discussion.

Lucius
Eliezer Yudkowsky
Richard Feynman
Brandon Sanderson
Albert Camus

theICONiac
Originally posted by inimalist
you know Leary was a world renown psychologist who designed many of the psychiatric tests still in use today?

Quite.

Although take away the drugs and he loses that certain pizazz, no?

theICONiac
Originally posted by King Kandy
I love science, though I am a chemistry student not a physicist. But I am actually speaking more in reference to the moral/political views espoused by Einstein.

And where's your PhD?

I have a diploma from the Stratford Career Institute. BEAT THAT! stick out tongue

Just curious as to why Einstein would be your role model is all...

inimalist
Originally posted by theICONiac
Quite.

Although take away the drugs and he loses that certain pizazz, no?

you mean take away a central part of a person's development and experience and they become someone different?

obvious points are obvious too, aren't they?

theICONiac
Originally posted by inimalist
you mean take away a central part of a person's development and experience and they become someone different?

obvious points are obvious too, aren't they?

Exactly!

Had King Kandy mentioned Freud/Pavlov/Jung etc. no one would nary bat an eye...but Leary? First thing that comes to mind is...wait for it, DRUGS!

inimalist
Originally posted by theICONiac
Exactly!

Had King Kandy mentioned Freud/Pavlov/Jung etc. no one would nary bat an eye...but Leary? First thing that comes to mind is...wait for it, DRUGS!

so you are trying to mock Kandy because you have a superficial level understanding of Tim Leary's impact on science and society?

theICONiac
Originally posted by inimalist
so you are trying to mock Kandy because you have a superficial level understanding of Tim Leary's impact on science and society?

I'm not sure where you draw the mocking part from.

Perhaps I should type slower? embarrasment

inimalist
lol, replace the verb, the point remains

theICONiac
Originally posted by inimalist
lol, replace the verb, the point remains

stick out tongue

Since you seem so intent on joining the discussion care to mention who inspires you?

inimalist
it really depends what you are talking about

there are really few individuals that have impacted my life outside of the specific field they are in. Like, I could talk about artistic or musical influences, but they would rarely cover my moral and philosophical ones, which would be different from my political or scientific ones...

Desmond Tutu is up there... Andres Serrano... R A Fisher... Ayn Rand... but those are all from such different aspects of my personality, I would hardly be able to say one is more or less a role model, and there would be dozens more

theICONiac
Originally posted by inimalist
it really depends what you are talking about

there are really few individuals that have impacted my life outside of the specific field they are in. Like, I could talk about artistic or musical influences, but they would rarely cover my moral and philosophical ones, which would be different from my political or scientific ones...

Desmond Tutu is up there... Andres Serrano... R A Fisher... Ayn Rand... but those are all from such different aspects of my personality, I would hardly be able to say one is more or less a role model, and there would be dozens more

Anybody who encompasses most (the majority I guess) of your personality traits?

King Kandy
Originally posted by theICONiac
Exactly!

Had King Kandy mentioned Freud/Pavlov/Jung etc. no one would nary bat an eye...but Leary? First thing that comes to mind is...wait for it, DRUGS!
Freud was a cocaine addict who wrote articles saying it was amazing and everyone should use it. Not to mention you didn't bat an eye on Ken Kesey on my list and he probably used more drugs than them both combined. So it is quite curious you singled Leary alone out on that. As if the only aspect of his life is "he liked acid".

inimalist
Originally posted by theICONiac
Anybody who encompasses most (the majority I guess) of your personality traits?

I don't believe in personality traits, unfortunately

theICONiac
Originally posted by King Kandy
Freud was a cocaine addict who wrote articles saying it was amazing and everyone should use it. Not to mention you didn't bat an eye on Ken Kesey on my list and he probably used more drugs than them both combined. So it is quite curious you singled Leary alone out on that. As if the only aspect of his life is "he liked acid".

So I am in error.

Why is he your role model?

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by theICONiac
Quite.

Although take away the drugs and he loses that certain pizazz, no?

What?

That's like saying that Einstein isn't so impressive without Relativity and the Photoelectric Effect. It's true but utterly pointless.

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by inimalist
I don't believe in personality traits, unfortunately

Not even as pragmatic labels?

Mindset
Originally posted by King Kandy
I was curious about this. I'm an atheist, so I don't use any holy book as a guide to my life. But nonetheless, I do have people whose lives and teachings, I find highly applicable to myself and try to go by. I'm curious what people other members consider their "role models".

I have a lot of them, but here's a short few:

Mindset

Thomas Jefferson
Mozart
Nikola Tesla
Hunter S. Thompson

Mainly for their work ethic and ability to think in unconventional ways. They also didn't care about what people thought of them.

theICONiac
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
What?

That's like saying that Einstein isn't so impressive without Relativity and the Photoelectric Effect. It's true but utterly pointless.

Yeeeeeeeeeahhhh...

So Leary has no further appeal beyond the drugs is what you are saying?

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by theICONiac
Yeeeeeeeeeahhhh...

So Leary has no further appeal beyond his entire career as a scientist and social activist is what you are saying?

fixed that for you

Leary cannot be extricated from "drugs" any more than Edison can be extricated from "inventing".

inimalist
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Not even as pragmatic labels?

personality traits that are stable from situation to situation are rare and really, would be horribly maladaptive.

there is something to be said for people who are low social monitors (they have a lower level of social influence on their behaviour), but as you get into the extremes, well, this is entirely something I'm making up on the spot, but it would be indistinguishable from autism.

so I suppose you could use traits to describe people in certain contexts, and describe how consistent that behaviour is across contexts, but in general, no, I don't believe in trait theory of personality at all.

inimalist
Originally posted by theICONiac
So Leary has no further appeal beyond the drugs is what you are saying?

Leary is a man who challanged the conventional American establishment so much that the president labeled him the most dangerous man in America...

I think of that, the Weather Underground, and the fact that Leary wrote most of the psychological tests they gave him in prison when I think of his impact on society... That all you know is drugs says something much more profound about your understanding.

theICONiac
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
fixed that for you

Leary cannot be extricated from "drugs" any more than Edison can be extricated from "inventing".

Hey, we are getting somewhere! big grin

Let's continue with this train of thought. We are on a role here...

So when one proclaims Leary a role model (an individual by your own admission who cannot be extricated from "drugs" he endorsed) can one assume that drugs are a component of that admiration?

theICONiac
Originally posted by inimalist
Leary is a man who challanged the conventional American establishment so much that the president labeled him the most dangerous man in America...

I think of that, the Weather Underground, and the fact that Leary wrote most of the psychological tests they gave him in prison when I think of his impact on society... That all you know is drugs says something much more profound about your understanding.

I am sorry you are not getting my point.

Digi
That's kind of the trouble with taking "role models" too literally. We wouldn't want to become another person, so no role model is someone we'd want to emulate 100%. It's just varying degrees of cherry-picking traits and aspects of a person.

Again, I feel like "heroes" is easier to quantify. A person can be your hero and you could want to be nothing like them. Role model has such a heavy implication of emulation, that it makes it difficult to truthfully ascribe to anyone fully.

inimalist
Originally posted by theICONiac
I am sorry you are not getting my point.

elaborate then

ADarksideJedi
God my father and my husband!

theICONiac
Originally posted by inimalist
elaborate then

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_Leary

Timothy Leary is known for his advocacy of psychedelic drugs in treatment of mental disorders. He is also known for his use of said drugs.

This is primarily what he is known for in modern society. His subsequent achievements really mean dick to the vast majority of the population.

When King Kandy listed him as a role model I questioned it due to the drugs...a natural, logical query.

Somehow this conversation has degenerated into 'well yeah, he like, did drugs but thats not what he is all about!'

Would someone please explain the appeal of Leary if not for the drugs and all his escapades fighting the law?

inimalist
why arent those enough? "all his escapades fighting the law" are not something that can really be hand waved away...

For instance, his desire to use science as a way of fighting against the state would be a reason he'd be a role model of mine.

this is silly, i need to go buy a tie...

Mindset
Can we all just agree that I am a role model to all of you.

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by theICONiac
So when one proclaims Leary a role model (an individual by your own admission who cannot be extricated from "drugs" he endorsed) can one assume that drugs are a component of that admiration?

Not really. If you have no other information it's the guess that will be right the most times but that's not a very useful thing to know. An individual could conceivably be anti-drug and still respect his conviction or really hate Nixon or like his work on personality theory. Drugs defined his life but they weren't his whole life.

It's sort of like thinking that because inimalist like Desmond Tutu it must be because Tutu is African. Sure being African has defined pretty much every aspect of his life but that doesn't make it the entirety of the man.

My issue with your responses so far has been that you're being dismissive of Leary as just being the drug guy (or possibly you've worded your statements about him that way in order to troll people).

-Pr-
Roy Keane
Superman

Nobody else really "inspires" me that much.

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by theICONiac
Somehow this conversation has degenerated into 'well yeah, he like, did drugs but thats not what he is all about!'

Few people here are going to care that he "did drugs". Lots of people "did drugs". The important bit is that he did science involving drugs at a time when that was extremely controversial and he never backed down because of it.

If you want to dismiss that as just doing drugs you're welcome to do so but it does make you fairly stupid.

theICONiac
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Not really. If you have no other information it's the guess that will be right the most times but that's not a very useful thing to know. An individual could conceivably be anti-drug and still respect his conviction or really hate Nixon or like his work on personality theory. Drugs defined his life but they weren't his whole life.

It's sort of like thinking that because inimalist like Desmond Tutu it must be because Tutu is African. Sure being African has defined pretty much every aspect of his life but that doesn't make it the entirety of the man.

My issue with your responses so far has been that you're being dismissive of Leary as just being the drug guy (or possibly you've worded your statements about him that way in order to troll people).

Perhaps King Kandy will chime in and finally reveal to us why Timothy Leary is his role model and we can put this whole thing behind us!

theICONiac
Originally posted by Mindset
Can we all just agree that I am a role model to all of you.

I'd rather have Colossus Big-C as a role model... eek!

theICONiac
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Few people here are going to care that he "did drugs". Lots of people "did drugs". The important bit is that he did science involving drugs at a time when that was extremely controversial and he never backed down because of it.

If you want to dismiss that as just doing drugs you're welcome to do so but it does make you fairly stupid.

And if Leary was hot-to-trot on herbal remedies like Saint John's Wort instead of psychedellic drugs we would not be having this conversation.

theICONiac
Originally posted by -Pr-
Roy Keane
Superman

Nobody else really "inspires" me that much.

If we are allowed to cite fictional characters then I add 'Walker, Texas Ranger'.

Batman-Prime
My Grandfather
Jesus
Siddhartha Gautama
Superman
Sokrates

I know I'm so kuhl stick out tongue

Mindset
Originally posted by theICONiac
I'd rather have Colossus Big-C as a role model... eek! That says a lot more about you than it does about me.

theICONiac
Originally posted by Mindset
That says a lot more about you than it does about me.

That was a joke. wink

Mindset
So was mine.

theICONiac
Originally posted by Mindset
So was mine.

big grin

K...I'd choose you over Colossus Big-C, but you would definitely lose to muh man Quan.

King Kandy
Originally posted by theICONiac
Perhaps King Kandy will chime in and finally reveal to us why Timothy Leary is his role model and we can put this whole thing behind us!
I would say I admire him due to his countless contributions to the fields of psychology, championing of human rights as well as his attempts to provide a link between science and religion (including but not limited to research into psychedelic drugs).

More than half the people on my list used psychedelic drugs so I can't see why you're picking on him.

theICONiac
Originally posted by King Kandy
I would say I admire him due to his countless contributions to the fields of psychology, championing of human rights as well as his attempts to provide a link between science and religion (including but not limited to research into psychedelic drugs).

More than half the people on my list used psychedelic drugs so I can't see why you're picking on him.

hoover

Timothy Leary is known for his advocacy of psychedelic drugs in treatment of mental disorders. He is also known for his use of said drugs.

It was just a question.

dadudemon
Originally posted by inimalist
For instance, his desire to use science as a way of fighting against the state would be a reason he'd be a role model of mine.

That's a pretty good reason to admire him as a role model.

There are probably much better choices, but a psychologist or a student of the mind would find Leary more appealing...just the same as Walter Peyton is a role model of mine due to my interest in football...but there's probably better athletes that were good role models to kids.


Honestly, I think you're being trolled.

theICONiac
Originally posted by dadudemon
Honestly, I think you're being trolled.

roll eyes (sarcastic)

Could also be an honest attempt to understand the perspective of someone who admires one the most controversial figures of the 20th century??

For some reason people here are afraid to engage in discussion that may possibly cast the late, great Mr. Leary in a potentially negative light.

inimalist
Originally posted by dadudemon
There are probably much better choices, but a psychologist or a student of the mind would find Leary more appealing...

it probably depends on what you mean by better, but I dont know another scientist who has been called the most dangerous man in America.

Julian Assange might be close, but he isn't a scientist... Galelaio I suppose, but those circumstances seem different to me

Originally posted by dadudemon
Honestly, I think you're being trolled.

sym and KK got it worse, but no doubt

Omega Vision
Originally posted by dadudemon
That's a pretty good reason to admire him as a role model.

There are probably much better choices, but a psychologist or a student of the mind would find Leary more appealing...just the same as Walter Peyton is a role model of mine due to my interest in football...but there's probably better athletes that were good role models to kids.


Honestly, I think you're being trolled.
Impossible. Iconiac has never been known to troll.


Ever.

theICONiac
Originally posted by Omega Vision
Impossible. Iconiac has never been known to troll.


Ever.

My ol' buddy Omega wink

dadudemon
Originally posted by inimalist
it probably depends on what you mean by better, but I dont know another scientist who has been called the most dangerous man in America.

Julian Assange might be close, but he isn't a scientist... Galelaio I suppose, but those circumstances seem different to me

I would think that Wundt or Freud would be better psychology "role models" than Leary for at least their pioneering work. I know Freud was ****ing insane with some ideas, but he can still be admired for at least being a major figure. But, come one..."Penis Envy". laughing

inimalist
Originally posted by dadudemon
I would think that Wundt or Freud would be better psychology "role models" than Leary for at least their pioneering work. I know Freud was ****ing insane with some ideas, but he can still be admired for at least being a major figure. But, come one..."Penis Envy". laughing

Wundt is cool, but not a lot of what he did is really relevant to what I do or how I think about psych (as is most stuff prior to the cognitive revolution actually... Someone like Golgi, who was staining neurons, might even be a better choice, though he was a physiologist, his approach to the mind, afaik, was way more in line with mine than that of early psychologists). Fechner, in terms of "fathers of psychology" is more a role model, given his interest in perception and, ****, he invented psychophysics, something that even informs the way I now look at the motor system. Or Helmholtz for his early stuff on the electrical properties of Neurons.

Freud I don't like at all, like, period. I don't think his impact has been positive, in fact, I think he has done more to confound how we understand individuals than most anyone else in psych's history. No, it isn't his fault that he became as famous as he did, or that his "id, ego, superego" stuff became so ingrained in society, but honestly, I don't have much love for the man. I like Anna Freud more than her father by a long shot.

Actually, thinking about it, I really don't like that early-mid 1900s European approach at all. I'm way more into someone like Pavlov, Watson or Skinner (though they are a bit later, and Pavlov was Russian...). I'm not trying to pit one versus the other, as neither are perfect, but American psychology has always seemed more interested in biology and humans as acting systems rather than humans as these complex emotional conscious beings, but then, I don't do anything clinical stick out tongue

Chomsky, for his response to Skinner and his role in the Cognitive revolution, Fisher and Cohen for their stats, Fisher especially for his approach to data and how to determine probabilities. Lakatos for similar reasons. Hell, if I'm just name dropping at this point, add Broca, Goodayle and Gazannaga, for their research on people with neurological injuries and how they were able to piece together how the brain worked from that. Triesman and Wolfe specifically for their perception work, Watson and Humphreys similarly, though to a lesser degree.

Probably the single most influential person in terms of my philosophy on psychology and such is a guy by the name of Nairne, who talks about something called "functionalism", where we talk about human behaviour in terms of what function it serves to either the individual in their immediate context, their development, or through evolution. There have been types of functionalism throughout the history of psych, but generally I find Nairne's the best and most relevant.

When you meet people who study psychoanalysis and talk seriously about penis envy, it becomes less hilarious.

lord xyz
My role model is inimalist. kinda

inimalist
oh, and about Leary:

Compared to Wundt and Freud, he is far more of a role model for me, even if we just consider the science of it. For one, his research into LSD had results. For instance, though the work was only ever pilot, LSD had an astronomically greater rate of success treating people with alcoholism. Not only that, the idea of using psychoactive substances in clinical settings saw results with MDMA, among other things. So even if we just stop there, we see he pioneered a method of using substances for clinical purposes, which, were cheap, relatively quick, effective and didn't end with a patient on a regiment of pills and in therapy for years. Ignoring everything else, that seems like a reason to look up to him, and if you compare his approach to therapy to someone like Freud, Freud looks like a joke, even though he is more famous.

If we move that a step further, even ignoring that there is any controversy or whatever, the idea that psychoactive substances have a place in research is something that I am behind 100%. Not just as a subject of study, but as an actual tool of study (much like Leary wanted to use them as a tool of therapy). Brain injury and lesion have provided a huge chunk of what we know about how the brain works, and drugs generally give researchers the ability to produce controlled and impermanent lesions into a person, to observe the behavioural results. This is essentially what TMS does, only the potential with drugs is that you could design things that are incredibly specifically targeted to certain neurotransmitters, rather than local populations of neurons.

The reason we think Broca is amazing but Leary is a criminal is the political side to his research. I've had plenty of discussions with profs about the use of drugs for potential artificial lesions, and I've had 100% agreement, with the caveat that nobody thinks it would be do-able because the government wouldn't allow it...

Originally posted by lord xyz
My role model is inimalist. kinda

I'm like Charles Barkley though

dadudemon
It's hard for me to relegate Freud to being detrimental to modern psychology. I just don't see that as plausible/sustainable in any sort of intelligent dialogue concerning modern psychology. IMO, that's worse than saying Einstein set back physics decades with his incorrect ideas (he had many). Is it not more important to get people thinking than it is to force people to fall in line?

If you're referring to Freud's influence on laymen, sure: he may have set back the laymen decades.


I still think Wundt would be a good role-model for a psychology student. Not necessarily what he was wrong about, but how much of a pioneer he was and the lasting good his work created for psychology. Wundt is just an amazing intellect with knowledge and academic work spanning multiple subjects. It's hard to dislike him for anything except not making up his mind. I read that he was a strict but very likeable professor.

jaden101
Can't say there's many I can name off the top of my head at the moment....Professor Brian Cox is one...Not because the work he is doing is physics is particularly significant but because his broadcasting work shines a positive light on science and his demeanor and passion for what he does always comes through and he seems like a genuinely interesting and likeable guy.

Watch his 2 main BBC documentaries "Wonders of the Solar System" and "Wonders of the Universe" to see what I mean.

King Kandy
Originally posted by theICONiac
hoover

Timothy Leary is known for his advocacy of psychedelic drugs in treatment of mental disorders. He is also known for his use of said drugs.

It was just a question.
Cool. As you probably noticed by the fact that over half my picks did, the fact that he used drugs is not exactly a downside to me. As far as advocating it for treatment, he did advocate studying its effects for psychiatric use; as any reasonable person would, when a new drug is introduced. Its a shame he never was able to conduct those studies, because the Harvard establishment wasn't interested in such potential bad press. It draws the mind back to the Church's reaction to Galileo. I would have hoped we'd moved past blocking subjects from science because they are impolitic.

alltoomany
father knows best

Martian_mind
Batman
King Arthur
Marc Antony
Titus Pullo
Lucius Vorenus.

I'm somewhat detached from reality, and thus don't really find inspiration from other people.

inimalist
Originally posted by dadudemon
It's hard for me to relegate Freud to being detrimental to modern psychology. I just don't see that as plausible/sustainable in any sort of intelligent dialogue concerning modern psychology. IMO, that's worse than saying Einstein set back physics decades with his incorrect ideas (he had many). Is it not more important to get people thinking than it is to force people to fall in line?

If you're referring to Freud's influence on laymen, sure: he may have set back the laymen decades.


I still think Wundt would be a good role-model for a psychology student. Not necessarily what he was wrong about, but how much of a pioneer he was and the lasting good his work created for psychology. Wundt is just an amazing intellect with knowledge and academic work spanning multiple subjects. It's hard to dislike him for anything except not making up his mind. I read that he was a strict but very likeable professor.

I'm not saying Wundt wouldn't be a good role model, I'm saying he isn't on of mine

and regarding Freud, well, I just disagree and I think you are confusing the popularity and hype around Freud as a personality with anything he might have done significant for science, and without a doubt, Freud's ideas about the mind and individuals still are preeminent in our society, doing a huge degree of damage to how people understand psych

I was at a dinner for the grad students in my department, and I asked them what they thought of Freud. Of the 6 I asked, 5 said, point blank, he was a joke. The sixth only said he deserved respect as a popularizer of science in his time, but scientifically was a joke. Freud wasn't even really ahead of his time compared to his contemporaries. Don't take this personally, but imho, saying you respect Freud as a psychologist is like saying you like Dr. Phil as a therapist. Sure, more people know who he is than, say, someone who does real and worthwhile science, but how is that a good thing when that popularity corrupts people's understanding of human behaviour?

msalexander
the personality which should be role model for you must have some very special and impressive qualities i am really impressed by
Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah
________

Mindship
I was never a fan of Freud, or of psychoanalytical systems in general, but he did make some good, broad points (and a few surprisingly specific ones). Mostly, I think Freud is regarded as one of those thinkers who gave a jab-cross-hook to humanity's pride, ie, showed us that we're not all-that. Copernicus took us out of the center of the universe; Darwin connected us to all subhuman life; and Freud reminded us that we're not as rational as we like to think.

inimalist
by being entirely irrational himself?

I don't mean to beat a dead horse, but like, when you even look at the people who were Freud's students at one point (I'm thinking Adler specifically), they had a far superior grasp of human behaviour than Freud did, and in the end, were much more impactful in terms of the science of psychology.

Like, to see Freud placed on a pedestal with Copernicus and Darwin honestly makes me feel like the hugest failure in the world. No matter how interesting and amazing the work that has been done in the past 80 years is, psychologists have been pathetically unable to galvanize the public like Freud did... That is something that really needs to be changed...

For instance, both Darwin and Copernicus are loved because, well, they had theories that worked. Freud's theories were, at best, arm chair pop-psychology, and when put into practice, hugely detrimental. There is the case of the woman who had unnecessary and botched facial surgery as treatment for menstrual cramps because of Freud's theories, and his adamant recommendation that people use cocaine lead to the death of one of his good friends... He was so anti-science that he declared that anyone who even questioned his methods of psychoanalysis were no longer allowed to study with him and must be shunned by his group.

Like, I don't mean this personally to anyone, but if you honestly think Freud is an important name in psychology you have to read more psych... Even read more psych from the late 1800 early 1900, compare it to what Freud was thinking, it is utter nonsense, and everyone knew it was nonsense, except for the public who love a controversial figure

EDIT: Freud is to psychology what Lamarck is to evolution or Brahe to cosmology...

Digi
I actually didn't think Freud was accepted even in mainstream culture anymore. Nearly all of his work has been debunked ad nauseum, and I've never even been remotely close to psychology as my field of study.

Probably I'm wrong. I'm always finding surprising things that people still believe. I almost did a spit-take when an ex told me she believed in Ouija boards.

It's actually one of my only criticisms of Joseph Campbell's approach to mythology and religion. He's probably the person whose worldview I model my own around most closely, yet he tried to tie myths into accepted psychological teachings of the time. Where he tries to relate myths to, say, Freud and Jung is where his work is most dated.

inimalist
He has much more ardent supporters on this forum than I have seen in academia

One person in my lab, who has a neuroscience (BSc) undergrad degree has no idea what Freud thought or believed, which speaks volumes about his role in modern psychology and behavioural science. I learned more about Freud in Sociology classes than psychology ones...

Digi
There's a lot to be said about the Hero's Journey, in popular culture if nothing else, and I will always love how he manages to unify so much of religion and myth under common themes and banners. Strips religion of any literal import, while retaining the power of the stories and practical lessons that can be contained in them. I think a lot of that is fairly universal, and only gets attacked by those who believe in the literal veracity of the myths he's deconstructing.

He's also just a marvelous storyteller. I use his metaphors and paraphrase him a lot when having religious discussions. Or hell, even non-religious. I once borrowed a series of images and analogies from him concerning the splitting of light into the spectrum by a prism, to talk about esoteric (non-religious) orders like fraternities and freemasons, and their symbols, rituals, and the like.

But I'm also very able to say where I disagree. The early psuedo-psychological sections of Hero With a Thousand Faces still make me cringe. And occasionally he's too general about the stages of myth, using labels and themes broad enough to fit in numerous myths, but being so broad as to lose their meaning. I agree with the approach of his universalization, just not always the execution.

Mindship
Originally posted by inimalist
by being entirely irrational himself?

I don't mean to beat a dead horse, but like, when you even look at the people who were Freud's students at one point (I'm thinking Adler specifically), they had a far superior grasp of human behaviour than Freud did, and in the end, were much more impactful in terms of the science of psychology.

Like, to see Freud placed on a pedestal with Copernicus and Darwin honestly makes me feel like the hugest failure in the world. No matter how interesting and amazing the work that has been done in the past 80 years is, psychologists have been pathetically unable to galvanize the public like Freud did... That is something that really needs to be changed...

For instance, both Darwin and Copernicus are loved because, well, they had theories that worked. Freud's theories were, at best, arm chair pop-psychology, and when put into practice, hugely detrimental. There is the case of the woman who had unnecessary and botched facial surgery as treatment for menstrual cramps because of Freud's theories, and his adamant recommendation that people use cocaine lead to the death of one of his good friends... He was so anti-science that he declared that anyone who even questioned his methods of psychoanalysis were no longer allowed to study with him and must be shunned by his group.

Like, I don't mean this personally to anyone, but if you honestly think Freud is an important name in psychology you have to read more psych... Even read more psych from the late 1800 early 1900, compare it to what Freud was thinking, it is utter nonsense, and everyone knew it was nonsense, except for the public who love a controversial figure

EDIT: Freud is to psychology what Lamarck is to evolution or Brahe to cosmology... As I said, I was never a fan, but I have found some of his ideas about the unconscious useful, especially at work (generally I'm cognitive-behavioral). Sure, we've come a long way since then, and in a sense, I think we're saying the same thing: rightly or not (and you clearly think not, and I don't entirely disagree), Freud became the string around everyone's finger in thinking about ourselves differently.

theICONiac
Originally posted by Martian_mind
Batman
King Arthur
Marc Antony
Titus Pullo
Lucius Vorenus.

I'm somewhat detached from reality, and thus don't really find inspiration from other people.

smile Real life tends to be rather mundane. Hence our mutual fondness for comic books?

dadudemon
Originally posted by inimalist
I'm not saying Wundt wouldn't be a good role model, I'm saying he isn't on of mine

and regarding Freud, well, I just disagree and I think you are confusing the popularity and hype around Freud as a personality with anything he might have done significant for science, and without a doubt, Freud's ideas about the mind and individuals still are preeminent in our society, doing a huge degree of damage to how people understand psych

I was at a dinner for the grad students in my department, and I asked them what they thought of Freud. Of the 6 I asked, 5 said, point blank, he was a joke. The sixth only said he deserved respect as a popularizer of science in his time, but scientifically was a joke. Freud wasn't even really ahead of his time compared to his contemporaries. Don't take this personally, but imho, saying you respect Freud as a psychologist is like saying you like Dr. Phil as a therapist. Sure, more people know who he is than, say, someone who does real and worthwhile science, but how is that a good thing when that popularity corrupts people's understanding of human behaviour?




"Joke" would not be the proper label, imo. "Quack" or "dishonest science" would be better. And it's difficult to see him as this evil/destructive force when he helped modernize psychology and created lots of interest. You label it as "joke science that created popularity" and I'll label it as a scientist with dishonest/plain wrong methods that built a large foundation for modern psychology to take root.

And I think you've completely misunderstood my position.

Think of it an alternative way: pretend I become super infamous because I protest gays at dead soldiers funerals. My protests are obviously appalling, but I am bringing to light how important it is to be more tolerant of other's lifestyles. Sure, maybe I gain a few detractors that believe in my rubbish, but I am bringing to light a lot more enlightenment to others that disagree with me than people who follow me. I am talking about the Westboro Baptist church (WBC)... But I don't think they are even remotely as close to creating good from their (WBC) opposers than Freud did with his work. Because of Freud's work and people's willingness to disprove it/discredit it/take an interest in doing good science, psychology came a lot further today than it would have with out him. We needed a Freud type to spur interest. Freud was a pioneer and he was bold in what he did.


This is opinion but I do not find the following bad: "I find some of Freud's motivations and accomplishments to be role model worthy."

My grandfather is a huge role model for me, but he was mildly racist. That doesn't mean I can't appreciate that he was an extremely hard worker and valued altruism.

inimalist
fair enough

though I think your opinions of Freud are factually inaccurate.

Bardock42

NeoGills
I want to be a role model

kamal ata Turk
Mohammad Ali-Boxer
Circa,May 711 ad-Spain

these people inspire me alot...

TacDavey
Originally posted by Bardock42
And lastly there are a couple of KMCers, as is to be expected after 7 years, I suppose, that have so strongly and thoroughly influenced the person I am now that I feel like I should mention them

Victor Von Doom
Eis
Stan the Man
Kram3r
Da Moose
Sancty
But most of all TacDavey



whistle

Bardock42
Originally posted by TacDavey
whistle

lol, how could I forget

RobsonThomson
Charlie Chaplin

Omega Vision
Originally posted by Bardock42

Ayn Rand (Author, Philosopher)

You were doing so good until now. stick out tongue

Bardock42
Originally posted by Omega Vision
You were doing so good until now. stick out tongue

That's the Trotskyist in you speaking.

Thoren
Originally posted by Bardock42
THOREN...THAT IS ALL I NEED. I love you too man.

13

Cyner
This is difficult for me as I don't really view any human as being someone who is a role model for me aside from my father and even that is only in a couple of particular ways.

So instead I'm going to list some people who inspire me.

Jesus - all around good guy, altruist, but knew when to kick some ass, rebuked hypocrites and helped out children and the poor whenever he could.

C.S. Lewis - Author of numerous thought provoking and interesting fiction books, also wrote the children's series Chronicles of Narnia

Edgar Poe - not his life, but his writing inspired my current addiction to literature.

Satoshi Tajiri - took what he loved and made it into a career, making lots of money and lots of people happy in the process.

Peter - of the Bible. The guy was a huge failure, constantly messing up and having to learn the hard way. However he was the one who always had the courage to first try it, and even if he was going to fail he never stopped trying.

I'm sure there are more but I can't think of them right now.

Omega Vision
Originally posted by Bardock42
That's the Trotskyist in you speaking.
Lol. My main issue with her isn't even political, it's moral and in terms of her writing.

She didn't know her own limitations as a writer, which shows in Atlas Shrugged.

I haven't tried to read Fountainhead, but I enjoyed Anthem reasonably well. Probably because it was short, sweet, and to the point.

inimalist
While I don't think her fiction is particularly well written, the character of Howard Roark is interesting and represents an archetype not used enough imho. I don't read much, so what do I know... lol

Bardock42
Personally I enjoyed both Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead, I can't say if they are good writing or what to judge that by, but I enjoyed the characters, the unique outlooks and resolve of the heroes and the maliciousness, yet cowardice and weakness, of the villains.

It's very black and white, no doubt, but I don't think that has to be a bad thing, I think both these novels are very unlike anything I've read, and I think that's a very good thing to have.

To be fair though I do fall somewhat on the libertarian spectrum now, and used to much, much more zealously, so I may be biased.

Deja~vu
Just people that put others before themselves. That's the sort of people I admire.

I know, I'm weird. one eye

I'm just so sick of the selfish bullshit I see everywhere.

Omega Vision
Originally posted by Bardock42
Personally I enjoyed both Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead, I can't say if they are good writing or what to judge that by, but I enjoyed the characters, the unique outlooks and resolve of the heroes and the maliciousness, yet cowardice and weakness, of the villains.

It's very black and white, no doubt, but I don't think that has to be a bad thing, I think both these novels are very unlike anything I've read, and I think that's a very good thing to have.

To be fair though I do fall somewhat on the libertarian spectrum now, and used to much, much more zealously, so I may be biased.
Are you the only Libertarian in Germany?

Bardock42
lol, no, not quite.

Omega Vision
Originally posted by Bardock42
lol, no, not quite.
Say hi to the other five for me.

elbertrobe
My role models are

My mother
my Father
Eliezer Yudkowsky
Albert Camus

from new dellhi
Chief justice of india

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.