Originally posted by Regret
I do not nitpick, I blatantly disregard all explanations of behavior by way of mentalist fiction. I will present their claims if such comes up, and questions are asked, but I am a behavior analyst. Many of us [behavior analysts] even dislike and avoid the terms psychologist and psychology, as one cannot truly empirically study the "mind" as there is, at least speaking to the evidence at hand, no such thing.
Psychologists beg to differ 😆
And seeing as how Pyschology/Psychiatry has evolved at a much more consistant rate, and has worked wondors with many of our usual mental cases, I wouldn't go so far as to disregard it all the way 😉
Now, as for questioning Pyschology, yes. I beleive we should question EVERYTHING, even the data that serves our favor.
Originally posted by Regret
Once again, you show an utter lack of knowledge on the subject of psychology.
Really ? Oh greater than thou, please show me the error of my ways....
Originally posted by Regret
Behavior analysis is a fact. It is the most solid and heavily supported stance in psychology. It has been shown repetitively to be a fact. All behavioral principles are repeatedly tested and retested. Behavior analysis is as solid as any statement in physics or any other "hard" science.
Let me rephrase my argument, as I now see that I made the incorrect statement that Behavior Analysis was non-factual or unsupported. That is NOT what I meant.
What I meant was you are using Behavior Analysis in comparison to Theological concept of punishment. I understand and admire your attempt to integrate science and religion to support your beleif, however I heavily disagree.
Using Punishment in its social concept, NOT scientific concept, it is evident that PUNISHMENT does NOT always work.
Theology also does NOT use behaviorist definition of Punishment, only you are using it.
Religion in general, uses the social idea of punishment. If you look at the Bible, the concept "eye for an eye" is a punishment ideal, that has NO real successful basis for correction of an immoral behavior, in any way what-so-ever.
Even Pyschology rejects Punishment as a "quick fix" or "means of correction" which you are trying to push. It doesn't work bro....not in religion, not in reality.
Religion pushes the "punishment" of sin, but do you honestly beleive that punishing someone will stop them from further "sinning" ?
And Hell....how can ETERNAL punishment correct a behavior ?
Originally posted by Regret
A flawed lay definition of a term is irrelevant. When I speak of punishment I am referring to the scientific definition I provided.
But it's IRREVELANT entirely, since it does not logically apply to religion OR the concept of Hell.
Punishment by Theology is the inflicting of suffering, discouragement, or regret for a "sinful" action or thought. Your presented definition does not apply, since the terms of punishment are not being used consistantly.
Originally posted by Regret
I never claimed anything was a mental illness, let alone homosexuality. I merely stated that it can be considered such, depending on the individual case. Use of the term survive was in error, here is a better statement:
Heterosexuality or Bisexuality can be just as much a "mental illness" as homosexuality. Since homosexuality itself causes no harm, the STIGMA and Homophobia that is caused is the true catalyst of any "mental illness" here.
Originally posted by Regret
Mental disorders will fit at least one, but could fit more, of the following:[list=1][*]Present distress[*]Disability[*]Significantly increase risk of suffering, death, pain, disability, an important loss of freedom[/list]
Caused by what ? Homosexuality, or Homophobia ?
I think Homophobia is more of a mental illness than homosexuality could ever be 😬
Originally posted by Regret
At one point being homosexual resulted in the third being a consideration, and was thus considered to be a problem. I never claimed homosexuality was a mental illness, but it can be considered such depending on the individual and the context. Nearly all behaviors can be considered problematic in the proper context, and if rates exist to an abnormal level.
At what point do you speak of ?
Are you trying to push the idea that STD's is somehow EXCLUSIVE to Homosexual sex ?
Technically, Heterosexuality spawns more suffering, since the majority of people who SUFFER from STD's happen to be..... HETEROSEXUAL ! 😱
Originally posted by Regret
I believe that choice disappears at some point. I believe there are addicts (not including addicts at birth to to maternal error.) Do they currently have a choice as to whether or not to do the drug? Not in all cases, does this mean doing drugs initially was not a choice? Not at all, their past choices resulted in the present inability to choose, or rather the inability to alter their behavior without aid. This in no manner contradicts the belief that homosexual behaviors were chosen. Also, my belief is that homosexuality was chosen. So far science has not shown it to be otherwise.
Your beleif has no valid support however ❌
Homosexuality at its ROOT is homosexual attraction. Not homosexual sex, not homosexual thoughts....homosexual ATTRACTION.
Do you choose your attractions ? If so, please prove this to me....
Your Drug Addict analogy is not only OFFENSIVE but poor and unsuccessful. 👇
Your analogy implies that a Homosexual is NOT homosexual until he or she starts having sex. That is not the case, since there are plenty of homosexual and bisexual Virgins.
Now....that only leaves the possibility, according to your theory, that homosexual attraction is somehow chosen by the person. Okay...if that is the case, then name a possible scenario where a person chooses who they are attracted to....prove it to me somehow, if you CAN.
As a person who knows a great deal about Psychology, you must surely realize that the attraction OR desire for something must occur BEFORE the thought or action does....
So I ask you...where does the attraction come from ?
And why would someone willingly choose a MIND SET that would result in thier social isolation and discrimination ?
Originally posted by Regret
Oh, and btw thanks for keeping in form and bringing up the homosexual agenda of Urizen again 🙄
I used homosexuality once being considered a mental illness as support for my claim that Scientific Fact is not absolute, and that studies are ever-changing.
Again, enough with the whole "you keep talking about being Gay"...why do you keep talking about being a Mormon ? If I should only keep my sexuality discussions in "homosexual" threads, than YOU should only keep your Mormon beleifs and perspective in MORMON threads.... 🙄
You have your beleifs, I have mine....