You know how CBT is good and helps people with problems? CBT is the reverse.
So you know, safe spaces at universities. Speech codes!
Because they (the university people) all think that:
* What doesn’t kill you makes you weaker
* Always trust your feelings
* Life is a battle between good people and evil people.
Which are clearly false.
I Jon Haidt didn't make that up! (It actually was Greg Lukianoff who made it up). (E: And apparently kids who do this are literally doing the same as hitler).
Anyway, to be a bit more real, these guys (Jon/Greg) are so concerned about campus free speech that they are pathologizing their opponents ideas.
There's just no use for that sentence. "There's a parallel universe where I share this"? If that's not just padding the word count then it's the lamest threat in history. Oh no, please don't share it, hear my pleas and spare us
Remember, Yud is confident that the Many-Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics is the correct one.
Edit: he probably thinks he did reshare the tweet in a "nearby counterfactual world."
It feels like half-remembered modal realism. E.g. Judging the truth of a counterfactual statement by what obtains about an entity's counterpart in the nearest possible world.
Not sure what adding it does though, since 'I might have shared it' conveys the same information.
He believes the many worlds interpretation and [apparently dislikes modal logic](https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/vzLrQaGPa9DNCpuZz/against-modal-logics) (or he did 15 years ago, at least). But yeah, he could have just said that.
> Analytic philosophy ... doesn't seem to end up commensurate with what I need
This is hilarious. Modal realism is a reductionist program. It denies that possibility and necessity are primitives and instead reduces them to quantifiers over worlds. Possible and actual worlds differ only in that 'actual' points to the world of the speaker.
That is, it gives him what he claims to want. 30 years before he posted it.
I'm honestly baffled that he apparently learned about modal logics without hearing about modal realism.
I stopped paying attention to him when he advocated affirmative action for conservatives in academia. He really doesn't hide his political inclinations very well.
edit: Wait, so his argument is that colleges are giving students "reverse CBT" but are also "coddling" their minds? Which is it, Jon?
I guess I should give credit to his co-author for at least objecting to the "coddling" metaphor.
_Coddling_ is such a bad book, its popularity is sufficient indictment of the whole pop science genre. In a just world, haidt and lukianoff would have both lost several degrees for putting their name on that trash
> In a just world, haidt and lukianoff would have both lost several degrees for putting their name on that trash
Maybe in a nearby counterfactual world, they did.
Seems like a good time to mention Coddling of the American Mind is featured on the most recent episode of If Books Could Kill. This podcast is top grade Sneer!
https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/if-books-could-kill/id1651876897?i=1000603422829
This post removed in protest. Visit /r/Save3rdPartyApps/ for more, or look up [Power Delete Suite](https://github.com/j0be/PowerDeleteSuite) to delete your own content too.
That he thinks that an internet focussed on sharing interests is the new thing and social media networks the old things (so he can blame tumblr for all this) is already disqualifying. I read parts of his long ass blog article (easier to write blogs than to actually write papers which need to be peer reviewed I guess) and now im angry over the high amount of bullshit in it.
And lol at Yud going 'sounds plausible'. Dude you were there, you grew up on this shit, you should see the flaws. (guess he didn't read past the headline). He also blames 2015 things for effects in 2012, it is crazy.
His theory is literally that the reason for the increase in self-harm among teens is the advent of social media. Little girls in instagram have body image problems and he’s the one making that point.
Other people who I’ve read who have written about this do seem to blame iPhones. When you are only accessing social media at your house on a computer, you are able to create healthy distance but when it is with you constantly, compulsions become stronger and the bad effects worsen.
Who wrote about this? What methodology did they use to show that there's been a statistically significant uptick since 2007? What methodology did they use to blame iPhones besides puffing thoughtfully on a pipe in an armchair?
Something being self-evident is not proof, it's bellyfeel.
There is no study establishing causation between phones and the uptick in teen depression that I know of. I’m sorry for giving a false sense of authority, I was referring to opinion writing on the cause, not anything rigorous.
[Here’s a study measuring differences between political affiliations of teens](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666560321000438). [Here’s a recent CDC study containing trends in teen sadness and depression](https://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/data/yrbs/pdf/YRBS_Data-Summary-Trends_Report2023_508.pdf).
E: dumb little detail, but didn’t the manosphere sexists also do this
kind of concern trolling about womens mental health in 2012? I wonder if
you could dig up returnofthekings articles from that time.
These guys are Dunning Kruger on display for those with
narcissism.
A simple search negates the premise.
“For every 1 million youth ages 7–17, 29 juveniles committed suicide
in the U.S. annually between 1981 and 1998. The annual suicide rate for
youth ages 7–17 peaked in 1988 at 34 per 1 million, with the rate for
males at 50 per 1 million and the rate for females at 17 per 1 million
in that year.”
The whole plot of **Heathers** (1989) hinges on that it was pretty common in the 80s for a couple kids at your high school to kill themselves every year, so that no really looks closer at J.D.'s murders staged as teen suicides.
I had three female friends with suicide attempt wrist scars in 1988. And knew several people that ended their lives. Heathers really wasn’t that unbelievable for me in that aspect.
I was in high school in the 90s and lost a few classmates. A few attempts that were serious enough to land kids in the hospital, or at least be well-known gossip the next day.
I remember one was a girl who was pressured into her parents into being an Honor Student with a resume-padding ton of extra-curricular activities that she hated so she'd get into an Ivy League. So it was totally plausible that people just accepted that Heather Prime drank Drano because she was sick of being perfect.
I have a family member with wrist scars, only that happened because they smashed through a glass door by accident. Always wondered how many people saw it and assumed suicide attempt.
(Just pointing out that rarely scars occur for other reasons than suicide attempts and we can't make assumptions on seeing them, not trying to downplay the terrible loss of life in your social circle btw. Which sucks and you have my sympathies).
The suggested causality is bs, but there was a bump in teen female suicide rates after 2012 https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/images/databriefs/401-450/db433-fig2.png
That is because it looks like the 2000's were the exception, not 2012. [Source](https://www.statista.com/statistics/187478/death-rate-from-suicide-in-the-us-by-gender-since-1950/) (of course the 1950-70's could be the next exception but I didn't zoom out further, and soon you get into the more hazy period of recordkeeping. E: nevermind [here is a graph going to the 1900s](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41380-020-00875-4/figures/1)).
e: Not saying this to dunk on you btw, just that we need to be a little bit careful with these kinds of data. Esp as 'todays culture increases [kids/womens/mens] suicides, fucking [SJWS/feminists]!' has been a 'culture war' subject for ages.
I disagree with his analysis too, but (1) he doesn't really focus on suicide rates in the piece in question, and (2) your quoted stats don't reach the period he's attempting to explain. Also, the Dunning-Krueger effect has been demonstrated to be illusory.
Again, I don't agree w Haidt, but it's best not to counter him with weak arguments.
plausible? isn’t it the contrary that is plausible? poor rationality,
people need to reclaim that word from them. they are to rationality what
the “sovereign citizen” are to the law.
I assume you know what CBT is. (No, not that NSFW one, [the other one](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_behavioral_therapy))
I think they mean Reverse CBT would cause people to talk about suicide and then do it more. (People talk about 'social contagion' a lot regarding trans people, not that increased visibility of trans people is due to them feeling safe to show themselves, and there being more support for trans people (and the increased medical support causing less early deaths etc). But it is due to poor kids brains being so mallable and weak that they can be all influenced into being turned into trans people, as a fad. In the same way that kids commit suicide/act depressed as a fad (there certainly is a thing that talking the wrong way about people committing suicide can lead to increased suicides however)).
CBT can help with depression and other problems. So I guess reverse CBT makes it worse.
Looking into it further it all seems to be some sort of 'modern universities are coddling kids due to attacking them over microagressions causing more suicides' if you read [his actual article here](https://web.archive.org/web/20230314175946/https://jonathanhaidt.substack.com/p/mental-health-liberal-girls). Which has one big problem. He blames the 2015 university culture on the rise in 2012 teen suicides. Poor uni students, so depressed they go back in time to kill their earlier selves. He also blames mobile phones and tumblr for this. (Leading to gems like this: "Tumblr was different from Facebook and other sites because it was not based on anyone’s social network; it brought together people from anywhere in the world who shared an interest, and often an obsession." (you need to ignore a very large part of the internet to say things like that))
It is all very old man screams at clouds, which is made even worse (for him, as a person actually working for a university as a social psychologist) by the fact that the rise in suicides/depressive thoughts in 2012 is actually easier explained by the 2000's being very low in suicides, and not a baseline. ([see my post here](https://old.reddit.com/r/SneerClub/comments/11rgbbr/rationalists_being_rational_on_twitter/jcaaz67/)).
He eventually also starts to defend JK Rowling. Because all these dumb culture war brainrot people need to relate everything to everything. Pulls in Nagles 'kill all normies' book (that bad book did so much damage, in making 60 year olds believe they understood the internet).
Argh sorry this post turned into a general sneer rant at the subject at hand. And I didn't want to waste more time on this dumb shit. Im sorry if this didn't answer your question (I got to reading more subject matter here and then I just got a bit angry at 60 year old people doing culture war bs while not understanding wtf they are talking about).
“Reverse CBT” is when you treat the cock and balls very gently
nearby counterfactual world WHY CANT THESE PEOPLE USE WORDS BETTER
[deleted]
yes, it is known to be false, like everything you talk about, yud
Pure self-parody. Nothing else to say because nothing needs to be said.
lefthandednessovertime.jpg
E: dumb little detail, but didn’t the manosphere sexists also do this kind of concern trolling about womens mental health in 2012? I wonder if you could dig up returnofthekings articles from that time.
lana del rey released born to die in 2012 why doesn’t he ask her?
These guys are Dunning Kruger on display for those with narcissism.
A simple search negates the premise.
“For every 1 million youth ages 7–17, 29 juveniles committed suicide in the U.S. annually between 1981 and 1998. The annual suicide rate for youth ages 7–17 peaked in 1988 at 34 per 1 million, with the rate for males at 50 per 1 million and the rate for females at 17 per 1 million in that year.”
Genuinely startled that my ex-girlfriend is being the reasonable one here.
The irony is strong with this one
Critical support for Sarah here
In which Sarah Constantin wonders why her friends, the leopards, are staring at her face and salivating.
plausible? isn’t it the contrary that is plausible? poor rationality, people need to reclaim that word from them. they are to rationality what the “sovereign citizen” are to the law.
What is reverse CBT?
That has to be the weirdest way of saying “maybe it’s true” that I have ever seen.