Generalized anxiety disorder is characterized by persistent, excessive, and unrealistic worry about everyday things.

People with the disorder, which is also referred to as GAD, experience exaggerated worry and tension, often expecting the worst, even when there is no apparent reason for concern. They anticipate disaster and are overly concerned about money, health, family, work, or other issues. GAD is diagnosed when a person worries excessively about a variety of everyday problems for at least 6 months. Learn more symptoms.

Sometimes just the thought of getting through the day produces anxiety. They don’t know how to stop the worry cycle and feel it is beyond their control, even though they usually realize that their anxiety is more intense than the situation warrants.

Bummer of initials, GAD.

Is this person really a sociopath or just a narcissistic wanker? Would a sociopath publicly label themselves as such?

The bit about being a Sunday School teacher is intriguing.

I’ve been reading some anthropological work on hunter-gatherer societies which indicates that they are very egalitarian and when a man stands out (through being an especially good hunter or such) he will be treated in ways to discourage him from trying to use this to become a “big man” or chief.  Likewise, if a male uses strength or other means to try and bully his way to power in a group he will be attacked by a coalition of other males and even killed if he is exceptionally arrogant.  This started me wondering about the questions on bullying today.

I’m inclined to agree that some of these classifications only serve to increase drug company profits and pathologize quite normal behavior.

Stepping on Jesus

What is so ironic is that the people offended by the exercise don’t understand that was the point!

As someone wrote in Psychology Today, “Belief in voodoo…is still alive and well in this modern world.”

For those here longer than myself, have you ever considered the forums a great (if limited) source of human interaction.

Do you have any thoughts on reviewing topics within the forums on who has been successful on delivering a message and who has failed.

Do forums deliver data that can be used for studies on reason.

safewing

Now, since I see the level intelligence here is generally greater than that of the average adjunct lecturer, I’d like to pose the same question here. I think the answer is really a microcosm of our largest societal and cultural failing as well, and holds relevance

If psychology has learned, which was asserted in all my psych textbooks and materials, that humans generally learn best when studying in 20 minute intervals followed by a break, why aren’t our schools, especially psychology classes, practicing that method?

I understand there’s a myriad of reasons why not. We don’t have time to properly teach that way, yadda yadda yadda. These material reasons for not making changes to our educational systems worldwide, when we know for a proven and reproven fact that there is a much better way. The answer lies in the cultural tendency to accept normative society as it is and live within those norms.

My question then, what is the rational argument for ignoring what we essentially know is the best method to educate. Given the importance of education in all aspects of life, this should be a very basic proposition. Is there a rationally defensible opposing viewpoint?

The particular god posited is an artifact of that time in history.  At one time, the RCC was a world dominating organization, with only vestiges of its former power remaining, as its economic and knowledge power pales in comparison to western economic institutions such as corporations, military organizations and secular governments.  Islam is increasing in power, mainly as it harnesses the economic and social power of mostly the grossly poor and uneducated, but Islam also will likely diminish in influence, as it cannot harness and encourage technological advances, which in turn are dependent on science and inquiring research.  But as with Christianity, Islam as a church will not give up its power except by the application of superior economic and military competition that defeats it.  Intellectual arguments will not do so.  The god posited is as said largely irrelevant, whatever the bulk of the population seems to respond go will be proposed or at least used.  The key is that it is never any god speaking, but power-seeking people claiming to speak for some god, and in so doing they may garner the social and political compliance they seek from the society in which they live.  That has been a tried and true tactic for thousands of years.

I am not an atheist because I‘ve some unique insight that has lead me to not share in a religious belief in some god, but because I can observe the behavior of organized religions in dominating people for social, political and economic control.  A god is irrelevant, that’s just a non-existent referent used by people seeking to acquire or keep power over others.  It seems a common characteristic of many people to wish for and seek someone to tell them what to do and how to think.  There are secular political movement that do exactly the same and have the same traits as mentioned in the first paragraph.