They are everyday, ordinary people who have acquired guns. And they are also very hateful in that they believe what the mentally ill President Trump tells them, and they act on those beliefs.
Who is mentally ill? Look in the mirror. TDS is strong in this one!
None of the shooters were GOP, nor were any of the shooters in the last 50 years.
I think he is being sarcastic.
Should have had /sarc tags…and I should have had one less bourbon!
Probably, but most of s don’t have the Babylon Bee’s talent at writing satire, so it isn’t clear unless it has the /s tag.
I thought it interesting in the way that oddness is interesting, that after members of the mental-health profession have diagnosed the president as suffering from dementia or mental illness, a psychiatrist writing in the New York Times is claiming that other persons he has not met or clinically examined, persons who commit mass shootings, are sane.
Believing Mr. Trump to be mentally ill supports the full-court-press to remove a duly elected high official from government whereas believing mass shooters to be sane supports not only gun confiscation in the style of Australia and more recently New Zealand but also more vigorous political censorship.
Since this thread is about odd things believed by persons in psychology or the allied mental health professions, I thought I would share this.
In a slightly better world the murder of Genovese would have led feminists, and women in general, to support the Second Amendment.
“…psychology textbooks are not made up of facts students must learn. Instead, they are full of experiments and research techniques. Parables like the Kitty Genovese story serve to link the experiments to the real world. There is thus a strong incentive not to abandon the stories in the textbooks, even if the stories themselves are on shaky ground.”
If the “parables” are in doubt, they themselves are not linked to the “real world.” How can they be used to link anything else to it?
It’s like saying “This story may not be true, but if it isn’t, it ought to be,” upon which the untrue story is used as “evidence” supporting someone’s hare-brained speculation.
What has happened to human cognition?
I think Steve Sailer had been on top of this one some while ago.
Don’t know if he blames the mental health profession as much as he does a newspaper reporter, who thought this perspective would make for shocking, sensational story. A click-bait story if they had the Web back then.
This story just got reprinted and repeated in the telling.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/08/opinion/mass-shootings-mental-health.html
President Trump suffers from mental illness.
People who go on a shooting rampage do not.
They are everyday, ordinary people who have acquired guns. And they are also very hateful in that they believe what the mentally ill President Trump tells them, and they act on those beliefs.
Who is mentally ill? Look in the mirror. TDS is strong in this one!
None of the shooters were GOP, nor were any of the shooters in the last 50 years.
I think he is being sarcastic.
Should have had /sarc tags…and I should have had one less bourbon!
Probably, but most of s don’t have the Babylon Bee’s talent at writing satire, so it isn’t clear unless it has the /s tag.
I thought it interesting in the way that oddness is interesting, that after members of the mental-health profession have diagnosed the president as suffering from dementia or mental illness, a psychiatrist writing in the New York Times is claiming that other persons he has not met or clinically examined, persons who commit mass shootings, are sane.
Believing Mr. Trump to be mentally ill supports the full-court-press to remove a duly elected high official from government whereas believing mass shooters to be sane supports not only gun confiscation in the style of Australia and more recently New Zealand but also more vigorous political censorship.
Since this thread is about odd things believed by persons in psychology or the allied mental health professions, I thought I would share this.
In a slightly better world the murder of Genovese would have led feminists, and women in general, to support the Second Amendment.
“…psychology textbooks are not made up of facts students must learn. Instead, they are full of experiments and research techniques. Parables like the Kitty Genovese story serve to link the experiments to the real world. There is thus a strong incentive not to abandon the stories in the textbooks, even if the stories themselves are on shaky ground.”
If the “parables” are in doubt, they themselves are not linked to the “real world.” How can they be used to link anything else to it?
It’s like saying “This story may not be true, but if it isn’t, it ought to be,” upon which the untrue story is used as “evidence” supporting someone’s hare-brained speculation.
What has happened to human cognition?
I think Steve Sailer had been on top of this one some while ago.
Don’t know if he blames the mental health profession as much as he does a newspaper reporter, who thought this perspective would make for shocking, sensational story. A click-bait story if they had the Web back then.
This story just got reprinted and repeated in the telling.