Dr. Phil Says He's Embedded With ICE For Immigration Arrests In Chicago
Dr. Phil McGraw said on Sunday that he's embedding with Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials as they conduct what federal officials are calling "targeted operations" to enforce immigration law in Chicago.
You're viewing a single thread.
Firstly he's not a doctor. He's a fraud.
Secondly, there's nothing dangerous about tagging along with a bunch of thugs rounding up scared unarmed undocumented immigrants.
He has a PhD in clinical psychology. He's a doctor.
Still a piece of shit, though.
When was a last time a psychologist cured anybody?
Doctors in psychology are like doctors in philosophy: they're not doctors, they're people with a diploma.
A PhD is a doctoral degree. They are doctors. If you mean they're not an MD, say that.
A bullshit doctor isn't a doctor, is what I say.
Doctors has always referred to university teachers, hence "doctrine".
But medical practitioners were once simply known as "physicians", not "doctors". Eventually they wanted the same respect as doctors. So they gave up their system of apprenticeship and founded schools of medicine within universities, thus becoming university teachers aka doctors.
However it is incorrect to say that all doctors practice medicine. In fact, surgeons in the UK do not call themselves "doctor". Why? Because those early schools of medicine did not teach surgery, so surgeons were not considered doctors.
I'm aware doctors refer to people who are licensed to teach. And I'm aware of the difference between a MD and a doctor.
What I'm saying is a doctor - who can teach - in a BS discipline is first and foremost a fraud. There shouldn't be a PhD in psychology anymore that there is a PhD in alchemy or dowsing.
There shouldn't be a PhD in psychology anymore that there is a PhD in alchemy or dowsing.
Just curious and not debating you. From what angle do you arrive at psychology being bullshit? Is it from personal experience? Is it a religious thing? How did you come to this conclusion?
This isn't meant as an attack, I'm genuinely curious.
Well psychology is a pseudo-science. It's based entirely on suppositions that early psychologists - and mostly Freud - essentially pulled out of their asses. I have no trouble believing that it helps certain people to a degree, just like other pseudo medical stuff like acupuncture or homeopathy do, but mostly it's a grift to transfer money from people who need help to charlatan who can't provide it - and worse, keep those people in constant need of more help by encouraging them to wallow in whatever is wrong with them.
Now, bear in mind that I'm talking about psychology here, not psychiatry: the latter is a real medical specialty based on evidence and research. It does incorporate elements of psychology, because like all placebos, if it helps, why not. But the helpful BS is only a small fraction of psychiatry, not the entirety of it.
Okay, interesting (sincerely). I disagree about the pseudoscientific nature of psychology, but I appreciate you engaging with the question in a reasonable way.
Unlike alchemy and dowsing, psychology can make predictions that have been experimentally verified. To me, that means it is a science.
For example, suppose 100 people were asked whether they prefer to win $50 guaranteed, or a 50% chance of winning $100 and a 50% chance of winning nothing. Let X be the percentage who prefer the first option.
Now suppose they were asked whether they prefer to lose $50 guaranteed, or a 50% chance of losing $100 and a 50% chance of losing nothing. Let Y be the percentage who prefer the first option.
Psychology predicts that X will generally be greater than Y, and this has been verified experimentally. No other branch of science can make such a prediction.