![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 2 to 26 of 29. Go back in thread:
Posted by Rzip on January 19, 2001, at 21:27:46
In reply to It is the INTENTION that counts, posted by Rzip on January 18, 2001, at 23:10:52
> In the academic world of psychiatry, establishing validity for categorizing illnesses is acknowledged to be extremely challenging. For instance in the DSM-II (1970s), there were eight mood disorder categories. In the current in-use version of DSM-IV however, the figure for mood-disorder categories reach well into the 2,000s. It would be great if the advances in relating psychiatric diagnoses to direct concrete etiologic causes would have progressed at such a rapid rate:-) Psychiatric illnesses probably will never be classified at such a high validity as that of the somatic diseases. As one of my professors pointed out in class today, "How does your dopamine system feel today?" is a impossible and therefore silly question to ask any patient. On the other hand, it is very appropriate to ask a patient with a broken arm how his/her arm is feeling.
> >
> > Now, you ask yourself, what does this have to do with Dr. Bob's article (which I have not been able to read, yet). Well, my answer is that it has everything to do with Dr. Bob's reason for writting and submitting the article. You see, my friends, there is no finer and purer intention to be a researcher than the devotion to the life of the mind on the part of the scientist.
> >
> > I admire Dr. Bob from both an affective and an intellectual frame of mind. It is from this intellectual orientation that I am writing to you guys today. The field of psychiatry is challenging to work in because of the great amount of indirect approaches associated with it. The only way we can really study the mind is to surgically implant lesions and electrodes in the mind of the subjects of interest. Since it would not be ethical to do this in human subjects, we will have to resign ourselves to observing the correlates or actions deriving from the mind.
> >
> > What I wish to point out is that I observe Dr. Bob's intention for establishing PB to be purely and solely based on his intellectual devotion to his field. Like I said before, I have not read the article, however, I am going to assume that the theme of the article is to illustrate the effects of supportive or positive experiences have on depressions or other affective disorders. There is an attachment theory out there that runs something like this: Early negative or aggressive pattern of relationships steming from the parents to that of the infant imprints biological stimulants within the infant's brain such that upon puberty, the biological signals will produce the on-set of depression. The exception to this rule is that if the infant receives positive (supportive) re-inforcement growing up, the biological aspects of the brain can be "re-wired" to off-set the bad family influence. So, I kind of see Dr. Bob's PB site as the reinforcement of the set of positive/supportive experiences that is necessary to SLOWLY affect the biological aspects of the brain. In doing so, whether or not my assumptions are valid, Dr. Bob has shown to be a good role model by actively living out the Life of the Mind; which in my mind (pun not intended), equates to a good researcher and more importantly, a valuable human being.
> >
> > Finally, I would like to express my shock to the lack of appreciation for the means and service that Dr. Bob has provided.
> >
> > Instead, we should be extending a sincerely Thank You and Congratulations to Dr. Bob for his work.
Posted by dennis on January 19, 2001, at 21:53:10
In reply to Can I please get some response(s) to the post..., posted by Rzip on January 19, 2001, at 21:27:46
No
Posted by Kaarina on January 19, 2001, at 22:14:06
In reply to It is the INTENTION that counts, posted by Rzip on January 18, 2001, at 23:10:52
Sorry RZIP,
But I guess my mental aptitude isn't up to understanding the article. (Perhaps when I'm cured I'll be able to come back and reflect on it. But do not hold your breath .... )
DENNISI can't stop laughing after your response. It I understood!
Posted by Rzip on January 19, 2001, at 22:24:15
In reply to Re: No, posted by dennis on January 19, 2001, at 21:53:10
> No
That's mean :-(
Posted by Rzip on January 19, 2001, at 22:34:34
In reply to Re: It is the INATTENTION that counts, posted by Kaarina on January 19, 2001, at 22:14:06
> Sorry RZIP,
>
> But I guess my mental aptitude isn't up to understanding the article. (Perhaps when I'm cured I'll be able to come back and reflect on it. But do not hold your breath .... )Kaarina,
I like your word play in the title :-)
The just of my post is that there are a lot of gray areas to the approach to psychiatric treatment. So, I was just trying to point out that any research helps. However, I have to admit that I do not like to be the object of Dr. Bob's scrutiny either. On the other hand, I am honored to be a part of on-going betterment to the understanding of the human psyche.
- Rzip
Posted by Kaarina on January 19, 2001, at 23:11:47
In reply to Re: It is the INATTENTION that counts, posted by Rzip on January 19, 2001, at 22:34:34
"The just of my post is that there are a lot of gray areas to the approach to psychiatric treatment. So, I was just trying to point out that any research helps. However, I have to admit that I do not like to be the object of Dr. Bob's scrutiny either. On the other hand, I am honored to be a part of on-going betterment to the understanding of the human psyche."
I'm all for it too! Thanks for the summary.
But what do you mean by Bob's scrutiny? Because he monitors the posts?I personally think the poor guy needs a life. How much time do you think he spends reading all this stuff? (Oops, I'm probably going off topic here?)
Posted by Rzip on January 19, 2001, at 23:34:26
In reply to Re: It is the INATTENTION that counts, posted by Kaarina on January 19, 2001, at 23:11:47
> I'm all for it too! Thanks for the summary.
You are very welcome.> But what do you mean by Bob's scrutiny? Because he monitors the posts?
CORRECT!
> I personally think the poor guy needs a life. How much time do you think he spends reading all this stuff?
Way too much time! This site is probably a pet hobby for him. For the sake of his time and energy, I hope that he does not have too many of these time-consuming hobbies. What do you think is the deal with the constant picture switches on the top? I mean what is up with the half-light/half-dark portraits?
Posted by Gracie2 on January 20, 2001, at 12:18:49
In reply to Re: It is the INATTENTION that counts, posted by Rzip on January 19, 2001, at 23:34:26
Of course I don't know for sure, but I think Dr. Bob likes photography and the pictures are just for fun. I don't think there's any deep meaning or ulterior motive...
Gracie
Posted by dj on January 20, 2001, at 12:20:11
In reply to Re: It is the INATTENTION that counts, posted by Rzip on January 19, 2001, at 23:34:26
> > What do you think is the deal with the constant picture switches on the top? I mean what is up with the half-light/half-dark > >portraits?
Boredom, perhaps? Or if we put a more sinister interpretation on it perhaps it's a guinea pig experiment... ; )
Posted by Kaarina on January 20, 2001, at 12:56:14
In reply to Re: It is the INATTENTION that counts, posted by dj on January 20, 2001, at 12:20:11
I think he's taking the pictures himself. It's kinda like the lawyer defending himself. The picture would improve if he had someone else take it or a professional. The lighting is off. Perhaps he should take a course in photography?
Self-enrichment! Might be time better spent?
Posted by Rzip on January 20, 2001, at 13:48:36
In reply to Re: It is the INATTENTION that counts, posted by dj on January 20, 2001, at 12:20:11
> Or if we put a more sinister interpretation on it perhaps it's a guinea pig experiment... ; )
Dr. Bob never did an experiment on PB participants. He never took a sample from PB and devise any experiment around it.
I have read the article: "The Best of Two Worlds...". It is a scientific paper with all the conventional elements (Intro., Method, ...Conclusion, References); but it is not a research paper in the sense of any controlled experiment. When I have a chance to think about it more, and when more of you guys have read it, I'll offer my critic.
- Rzip
Posted by tina on January 20, 2001, at 15:32:07
In reply to What experiment? There is none., posted by Rzip on January 20, 2001, at 13:48:36
> > Or if we put a more sinister interpretation on it perhaps it's a guinea pig experiment... ; )
>
> Dr. Bob never did an experiment on PB participants. He never took a sample from PB and devise any experiment around it.
>
> I have read the article: "The Best of Two Worlds...". It is a scientific paper with all the conventional elements (Intro., Method, ...Conclusion, References); but it is not a research paper in the sense of any controlled experiment. When I have a chance to think about it more, and when more of you guys have read it, I'll offer my critic.
>
> - Rzip
Spare me........please. This is the most ridiculous thread I've ever read.
Posted by stjames on January 20, 2001, at 15:59:52
In reply to Re: What experiment? There is none., posted by tina on January 20, 2001, at 15:32:07
> Spare me........please. This is the most ridiculous thread I've ever read.
James here.....But don't spare me, I enjoyed it !
james
Posted by dj on January 20, 2001, at 16:12:24
In reply to What experiment? There is none., posted by Rzip on January 20, 2001, at 13:48:36
> > Or if we put a more sinister interpretation on it perhaps it's a guinea pig experiment... ; )
>
> Dr. Bob never did an experiment on PB participants. He never took a sample from PB and devise any experiment around it.
>
> I have read the article: "The Best of Two Worlds...". It is a scientific paper with all the conventional elements (Intro., Method, ...Conclusion, References); but it is not a research paper in the sense of any controlled experiment. When I have a chance to think about it more, and when more of you guys have read it, I'll offer my critic.
>
> - RzipWell, perhaps this is your experiment to see if we can differentiate a critic from a critique. ; ), < -- BTW, that's supposed to be a smiley with a WINK, like above.... ie. - take it with a LARGE grain of salt...
Posted by Rach on January 20, 2001, at 23:34:06
In reply to Re: No, posted by Rzip on January 19, 2001, at 22:24:15
I told you there was no text!!!
(so I guess I lied, kind of).
:)
Posted by Dr. Bob on January 22, 2001, at 1:55:26
In reply to Re: What experiment? There is none., posted by tina on January 20, 2001, at 15:32:07
> Spare me........please. This is the most ridiculous thread I've ever read.
Please be civil, thanks.
Bob
Posted by shar on January 22, 2001, at 12:12:08
In reply to It is the INTENTION that counts, posted by Rzip on January 18, 2001, at 23:10:52
> >Since it would not be ethical to do this in human subjects, we will have to resign ourselves to observing the correlates or actions deriving from the mind...
.......or kill, maim, torture, destroy hundreds of thousands of animals (rats, mice, dogs, cats, rabbits, etc.) per year by subjecting them to often horrendous experiments and then making ridiculous extrapolations from the animal response to the human response. People in medicine are already learning this doesn't work all that well (because...well, different species and little things like that, plus the number of people who have died due to those extrapolations...). I hope psychiatrists and psychologists will learn this, too.
> >there is no finer and purer intention to be a researcher than the devotion to the life of the mind on the part of the scientist
..........you are very generous, IMHO overly so. Having been in a similar field a while (psychology vs. psychiatry), I know the intentions you attribute to the researcher are not true of MANY (maybe most) researchers. Researchers live in a publish or perish environment that is unlikely to engender altruism, IMHO.
As for respect... I respect what Dr. Bob has done here, I appreciate his time used to monitor the board, the degree of restraint he uses to let us be ourselves, and his role in encouraging civil behavior. I also think his pics are fun.
Shar
>
> I think this post also belongs in Psycho-Social-Babble. It is in response to Dr. Bob's article debate. The original copy of this post is on PB-Administration.
>
> In the academic world of psychiatry, establishing validity for categorizing illnesses is acknowledged to be extremely challenging. For instance in the DSM-II (1970s), there were eight mood disorder categories. In the current in-use version of DSM-IV however, the figure for mood-disorder categories reach well into the 2,000s. It would be great if the advances in relating psychiatric diagnoses to direct concrete etiologic causes would have progressed at such a rapid rate:-) Psychiatric illnesses probably will never be classified at such a high validity as that of the somatic diseases. As one of my professors pointed out in class today, "How does your dopamine system feel today?" is a impossible and therefore silly question to ask any patient. On the other hand, it is very appropriate to ask a patient with a broken arm how his/her arm is feeling.
> >
> > Now, you ask yourself, what does this have to do with Dr. Bob's article (which I have not been able to read, yet). Well, my answer is that it has everything to do with Dr. Bob's reason for writting and submitting the article. You see, my friends, there is no finer and purer intention to be a researcher than the devotion to the life of the mind on the part of the scientist.
> >
> > I admire Dr. Bob from both an affective and an intellectual frame of mind. It is from this intellectual orientation that I am writing to you guys today. The field of psychiatry is challenging to work in because of the great amount of indirect approaches associated with it. The only way we can really study the mind is to surgically implant lesions and electrodes in the mind of the subjects of interest. Since it would not be ethical to do this in human subjects, we will have to resign ourselves to observing the correlates or actions deriving from the mind.
> >
> > What I wish to point out is that I observe Dr. Bob's intention for establishing PB to be purely and solely based on his intellectual devotion to his field. Like I said before, I have not read the article, however, I am going to assume that the theme of the article is to illustrate the effects of supportive or positive experiences have on depressions or other affective disorders. There is an attachment theory out there that runs something like this: Early negative or aggressive pattern of relationships steming from the parents to that of the infant imprints biological stimulants within the infant's brain such that upon puberty, the biological signals will produce the on-set of depression. The exception to this rule is that if the infant receives positive (supportive) re-inforcement growing up, the biological aspects of the brain can be "re-wired" to off-set the bad family influence. So, I kind of see Dr. Bob's PB site as the reinforcement of the set of positive/supportive experiences that is necessary to SLOWLY affect the biological aspects of the brain. In doing so, whether or not my assumptions are valid, Dr. Bob has shown to be a good role model by actively living out the Life of the Mind; which in my mind (pun not intended), equates to a good researcher and more importantly, a valuable human being.
> >
> > Finally, I would like to express my shock to the lack of appreciation for the means and service that Dr. Bob has provided.
> >
> > Instead, we should be extending a sincerely Thank You and Congratulations to Dr. Bob for his work.
Posted by tina on January 22, 2001, at 19:24:33
In reply to Re: please be civil » tina, posted by Dr. Bob on January 22, 2001, at 1:55:26
It was a joke Bob. Geezzzzzzz
> > Spare me........please. This is the most ridiculous thread I've ever read.
>
> Please be civil, thanks.
>
> Bob
Posted by Rzip on January 22, 2001, at 23:44:38
In reply to Re: please be civil-Hey BOB, posted by tina on January 22, 2001, at 19:24:33
> It was a joke Bob. Geezzzzzzz
>
> > > Spare me........please. This is the most ridiculous thread I've ever read.
> >
> > Please be civil, thanks.
> >
> > Bob
Posted by tina on January 25, 2001, at 10:19:28
In reply to Most of you guys do not take me seriously :-( (np), posted by Rzip on January 22, 2001, at 23:44:38
Maybe it's that you're too serious sometimes and we make light of it because it's hard for some of us to deal with seriousness when we're in our own bad places. Sorry, no offense intended.
> > It was a joke Bob. Geezzzzzzz
> >
> > > > Spare me........please. This is the most ridiculous thread I've ever read.
> > >
> > > Please be civil, thanks.
> > >
> > > Bob
Posted by dj on February 9, 2001, at 8:50:27
In reply to Re: Most of you guys do not take me seriously-Rzip, posted by tina on January 25, 2001, at 10:19:28
Just noted this for the first time. I agree with Tina. Perhaps you need to lighten up, RZip, not take yourself and everything so seriously and work on developing your sense of humour... : )
If we all did, perhaps there would be less acrimony, hurt feelings and abruput departures and cut offs on the boards...
> Maybe it's that you're too serious sometimes and we make light of it because it's hard for some of us to deal with seriousness when we're in our own bad places. Sorry, no offense intended.
>
> > > It was a joke Bob. Geezzzzzzz
> > >
> > > > > Spare me........please. This is the most ridiculous thread I've ever read.
> > > >
> > > > Please be civil, thanks.
> > > >
> > > > Bob
Posted by Ted on February 9, 2001, at 10:26:59
In reply to Re: Most of you guys do not take me seriously-Rzip, posted by dj on February 9, 2001, at 8:50:27
Remember: Humour is the best medicine, and one we could ALL use more of.
Ted
>Perhaps you need to lighten up, RZip, not take
>yourself and everything so seriously and work on
>developing your sense of humour... : )
Posted by dj on February 9, 2001, at 11:30:39
In reply to Re: Most of you guys do not take me seriously-Rzip, posted by Ted on February 9, 2001, at 10:26:59
I noted that in the second line of my post, which perhaps I should have put at the first and highlighted the ALL, just as Ted did, rightfully...
> Remember: Humour is the best medicine, and one we could ALL use more of.
>
> Ted
>
>
> >Perhaps you need to lighten up, RZip, not take
> >yourself and everything so seriously and work on
> >developing your sense of humour... : )
Posted by Rzip on February 9, 2001, at 13:02:31
In reply to Re: Most of you guys do not take me seriously-Rzip, posted by dj on February 9, 2001, at 8:50:27
Hi ALL,
I have a sense of humor. Really, I do. It just makes me feel really bad when people do not take my postings seriously. Like the horse humor on PB-Administration, for instance. Maybe I am delusional, but I really get the feeling that I do not get taken seriously here. Like, my posts usually get twisted around, or ignored. But still I prefer the humorous responses to none at all :-)
- Rzip
Posted by Noa on February 9, 2001, at 13:37:09
In reply to Re: Most of you guys do not take me seriously-Rzip » dj, posted by Rzip on February 9, 2001, at 13:02:31
RZip,
I often tend to skip very long posts. I just don't have the patience for them at the moment. And, a lot of yours happen to be long. It isn't personal. Sorry.
Go forward in thread:
Psycho-Babble Social | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.