'S'good

I wanna be

Sedated, oh the nothing wrong

And everything 's'good.

I wanna feel that way: slipping

I wanna float see

The forest; I am connected

The leaves, and I'm powerful because the sun, wag

The fingers of me in the hair of me in the wind of me in the trees of me:

Same thing

and jimbo knows the float see

He don't get out much NO MORE

But goings in and come out now

I wanna everything, 's'good?

Clinical or Professional Psychology

At The Blog of The Society of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology there is mention of the debate in psychology between clinical psychologists and professional psychologists. At first, this distinction was unclear to me. When I think of a “clinical” psychologist, I think of a practicing doctor who helps people, whereas a “professional” psychologist, under my first impression, meant to be a psychologist who professes the subject, a run-of-the-mill professor, as demeaning as that may sound. However, and if I am not just confusing myself even more, the distinction is opposite. A clinical psychologist is one who might subscribe to the model offered at The Psychological Clinical Science Accreditation System wherein it is assumed the public will best benefit by training psychologists as researchers where the whole fields can be reduced to the scientific method (Henriques, 2014). On the other hand, a professional psychologist fills the void left by The PCSAS where there is never a mention of “practitioners,” or those who are applying test manuals to effect change, those with PhDs that the top-tier research universities “begrudgingly” churn out.

As a new doctoral student in the wider field of psychology, the mention of identity in Henriques’ (2014) blog post is key to this debate. I thought I knew part of the answer at the orientation for new graduate students; the university’s president describe the graduate student pursuing more applicable knowledge for their career and the graduate student pursuing the lofty goal of advancing knowledge through research. However, it is my goal to effect change and my exposure to this debate leaves me asking whether the professional route is more fulfilling and less effective while the clinical route differs in any way.

As a professional psychologist I could be an administrator for a school or school district, or even be a co-founder of a charter school in which I effect change every day, however stressful it may be. On the other hand, I could work hard to publish my research while working in what I now think of as the confines of the university. Other routes include working for industry on textbook and curriculum design or pursuing political office to effect change, but as to where these ends fall on the clinical-professional spectrum is less clear. What is clear, however, is that all these goals are valid and respectable while all of them have their potential drawbacks. Much like the adage “degree-out, career-in” is no longer valid in the 21^st century, “PhD-out, Happiness-in” is an illusion, and possibly maladaptive at that.

While I continue to work hard on coursework, halfway through my first semester of graduate school, this is a question I am wrestling with. It seems to me that I can and will effect change and that end is true, but the means to that end are still ‘up-in-the-air.’ I hope not to be swayed too much by wealth; a professional or industrial job may lead to being in the top quartile of earners. I wish not to be persuaded by fame; a published professor may have only a few degrees of separation of many other clinicians. I desire not to be coerced by a strong focus on health; a stressful job may be necessary. Although wealth, fame, and health are all common goals to the human condition, it is also important to have a good balance and always be aware of the illusions of happiness that the world promises.

Quantum Laughter

My father's misconceptions about kilobytes, megabytes, and gigabytes always gave me the giggles when I was a youngster. "How could you confuse a 64 kilobyte machine with a 64 gigabyte machine?" I would think to myself. Dad always went on to say how when I got to be his age children would laugh at me how I confuse technologies.

The first time I heard of terabytes, I must've been 13 or 14. The logical procession of this would be the standard metric prefixes; petabytes would surely come along soon. I figured it must go on forever and ever. Until today.

I've been reading about Quantum mechanics in a book recently and (although it is probably some sort of fallacy) I feel like I hear the "Q" word everywhere now. Today I learned about Quantum Computing.

You see those kilobytes, megabytes, and gigabytes and forevers and evers are made up of "bits" of information, 1's and 0's. This method of computing must be fine as it can go on forever. But it must've taken someone far superior in knwoledge than me to see a problem in using these bits of information. They said "Why can't it be both 1's and 0's at the same time?" This is Quantum Computing. This is the future. This is a future-child giggling at me.

Instead of proceeding up the scale of metric prefixes, computing has invented a new root word, the "Qubit" that can be 1's and 0's at the same time. There is a Quantum Computer on the market right now that runs at 128 Qubits, and you can get one for about $9 Million. Perhaps a 64 MegaQubit iPod will come out in 50 years. This is Quantum Computing. This is the future. This is the future-Me laughing at my past-Self. And that is Quantum Laughter.

Originally published via Facebook Notes, May 20, 2014, by JSRaadt, with minor revisions.

The Star Wars Drinking Game

Drink If…

·      Someone has a bad feeling about this.

·      It's their only hope.

·      A woman other than Leia is on screen


·      There is a tremor in the Force.

·      It's not someone's fault

·      Someone exclaims "No!"

·      People kiss

·      Every time you find yourself talking to the people on screen

·      Luke whines.

·      Luke and Lando are in the same place at the same time

·      Leia insults somebody.

·      Anybody insults the Millennium Falcon.

o   Twice if Han brags about the Millennium Falcon.

·      Something doesn't work on the Falcon

o   Twice if it's the hyperdrive

·      Yoda uses bad grammar

·      R2-D2 plugs into the wrong socket and his head spins around.

·      C-3PO loses a body part.

o   Twice if he is completely dismembered.

·      The Emperor cackles evilly.

·      Stormtroopers shoot everywhere but where they're aiming.

·      Stormtrooper armor proves useless.

Other versions there are, but if the whole trilogy watching you are, too many drinks you may have.

Hamlet Sans

I heard something on the radio, not quite sure what it was, but it made me want to make this.

It is the famous "To be, or not to be" soliloquy from Shakespeare's Hamlet, but with a bit of change.

I have deleted all verbs and adjectives. Also, starting with the first line, I deleted every third line (so the 1st, 4th, 7th, etc.)

I think it's interesting how, although we may not even have ever heard the whole soliloquy, we can insert the correct verb.

----------

Whether nobler in the mind

The slings and arrows of fortune

And by them--

No more--and by a sleep

That flesh is heir to. A consummation

Devoutly--

For in that sleep of death what dreams may

When off this coil,

That calamity of so life.

For who the whips and scorns of time,

The pangs of love, the law's delay,

The insolence of office, and the spurns

When he himself might his quietus

With a bodkin?

Who fardels,

But that the dread of something after death,

The country, from whose bourn

And rather those ills

Than to others that not of?

And thus the hue of resolution

Sicklied o'er with the cast of thought,

With this regard their currents awry

And the name of action. -- You now,

All my sins.

Multilingual Abstract Noun and Suffixes

Most people learned what the definition of a noun is when they were very young: any person, place, or thing. There are also proper nouns which always receive a capitalized first letter. Additionally, there are abstract nouns. The capitalization of these nouns is debatable, but I prefer to do so.

The Fruitages of the Holy Spirit found in the Bible at Galatians 5:22, 23  are a superb example of the abstract noun. Instead of just a thing, it is a thing that intangible, or non-physical. The following is a list of the Fruitages in English, Spanish, Danish, and Czech.

Love	Amor	Kærlighed	Laska
Joy	Gozo	Glæd	Radost
Peace	Paz	Fred	Pokoj
Faith	Fe	Tro	Víra
Goodness	Bondad	Godhed	Dobrota
Kindness	Benignidad	Venlighed	Laskavost
Mildness	Apacibilidad	Mildhed	Mírnost
Long-Suffering	Gran Paciencia	Langmodihed	Trpělivost
Self-Control	Autodominio	Selvbekerkelse	Sebeovládání

As you can see it is not in order found in the passage, but organized according to syllables and suffixes in English. The first four have one syllable and no suffix; the middle three are two syllables and have the same suffix: "-ness;" the last two have varying syllables but are both hyphenated.

I find it very interesting how the Spanish translation follows this same pattern almost exactly. The first four have no suffix; the middle three have the same suffix: "-dad;" and the last two have varying syllables. This is surely evidence of the Gothic influence of both Spanish and French (viz. Middle French and Middle English).

Looking at Danish, the previous pattern is broken, but a new one emerges. Five out of the nine abstract nouns end in "-hed." If rearranged to this new pattern the list goes as follows:

Tro	Faith
Kærlighed	Love
Godhed	Gooness
Venlighed	Kindness
Mildhed	Mildness
Langmodihed	Long-Suffering
Glæd	Joy
Fred	Peace
Selvbekerkelse	Self-Control

Three out of four of the qualities in English that end in "-ness" end in "-hed" in Danish. Wouldn't it be weird if, instead of saying 'Goodness' we said 'Goodhood;' or instead of 'Love' we said 'Lovinghood.'

Finally, looking at Czech, there is also a pattern different from English:

Radost	Joy
Laskavost	Kindness
Mírnost	Mildness
Trpělivost	Long-Suffering
Laska	Love
Víra	Faith
Dobrota	Goodness
Sebeovládání	Self-Control
Pokoj	Peace

The first four end in "-ost;" the next four end in a feminine vowel sound; the last one ends in a masculine vowel sound. This is indicative of how far back the languages split. While Modern English was directly influenced by Danish and is in the same generational displacement  from Latin as is Spanish. Although Czech is  related to English, the most recent common ancestor is only the Indo-European language. That means that Czech is about as related to English as is Hindi.

I hope you learned something and enjoyed this post. Repost this link if you'd like or follow my blog.