Research paper!!

Journal Article:

Caze, M. L. (2005). Love, that indispensable supplement: Irigaray and kant on love and respect. Hypatia, 20(3), 92-114. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org.ezproxy.library.wisc.edu/stable/pdfplus/3811116.pdf?acceptTC=true

This article talks about love and the ways in which, people can view love as being essential to life or being a mere supplement (Caze, 2005). I think this will be really useful in my research paper because I am thinking about writing a paper about the different ways in which, we view love and the ways in which, we define it. This is a topic that really interests me because I feel as though it is difficult to know why we are continuously looking for something to love. Without love I feel like there would be no motivation to do many things. This topic seems like one that I could most likely write a lot on especially with the help from this article and my human sexuality class.

Book:

Hyde, J. S., & Delamater, J. D. (2010). Understanding human sexuality. (11 ed.). Boston,MA: McGraw-Hill.

This book is the book from my human sexuality course. This book has a chapter that is all about love and one topic that I find really interesting in being able to help me write my research paper is love stories. One perspective which, the book refers to is how love can simply be seen on a sociopsychological perspective where the only reason we look for love and a mate is simply so that we can produce viable offspring who can do the same, this goes with Darwin's "survival of the fittest" theory (Hyde & Delamater, 2010).

Chapter 10 and 11

  In chapter 10 of Jon Ronson's "The Psychopath Test" Ronson examines the history of how the DSM evolved from DSM I to DSM IV and he also discusses how Robert Spitzer helped contribute to the evolution of the DSM. Ronson writes about how there are now all these different types of disorders that people can be diagnosed with such as bipolar disorder and many others. He writes how many of these methods are hard to diagnose appropriately because there are no direct symptoms to the disorders which, makes it all the more easier to cause wrong diagnoses of disorders. Ronson writes how Spitzer sent in fake psychopaths to mental institutions to show that the psychology system was not really effective. His experiment showed how the mental institutions made lots of false accusations of people having disorders. When Ronson interviews Spitzer he tells Ronson about how some of the DSM III disorders could have been a mistake and these mistakes could have triggered more false convictions. Spitzer says that he does not like to think about his work that he has achieved as possibly being a mistake because he knows for a fact that some of it could have been.

  Overall, I thought the book was very interesting and really does help you think more about how psychology works in the world. I think that psychology is sort of a subject which, has lots of controversial issues which, makes it a difficult subject to study. I also was surprised that Tony from Broadmoor was released because it just seemed strange to me how they could know for sure whether or not someone was a psychopath in the first place and how they were cured. You never know if the person somehow mastered the art of being normal and accepting that he was a psychopath supposedly, and this can make the psychopath be able to get out of the mental institution. I also feel like it is wrong to diagnose pre-adolescents or adolescents at psychopaths at such a young age because at those ages is when they begin to learn more about how to express themselves and they are learning what is right from what is wrong. This can cause the people to act in odd ways but, this does not mean that they have a disorder it could just mean that they are learning proper ways to behave. I also feel that the way that Ronson describes pharmaceutical companies is the same as I learned in a educational film in sex class about how they just make all these medications to cure disorders when the disorder possibly do not even exist. The companies are just in it for the money.

Ch. 8 and Ch. 9

   In chapter 8 Ronson writes about Charlotte Scott who was someone who broadcasted people on television about various issues, specifically interesting ones like ones with psychological problems. Rachel who was a female who survived a terrorist attack on a carriage if I'm not mistaking. Rachel then starts posting blogs about what happened to her. Rachel is met with a lot of negative feedback, many people accused her of being a fake and just being one of those counterintelligence agents. Rachel is fed up with it and gets really frustrated because everyone thinks that it was just a power surge, while she knows that it was a terrorist attack. Ronson meets with Rachel because someone commented on a article he wrote accusing him of lying and being another "Rachel North" and he had no clue who she was or anything about her, so he wanted to know more. Ronson later on meets up with David Shayler who was a covert agent in M15 who was part of an assasination attempt on Gadhafi. David argues with Ronson that what Rachel says is wrong that it really was not a terrorist attack but it was a racist remark towards muslims being terrorists. Later on Ronson gets upset and tells David to "fuck off" and Ronson becomes nervous because the interview is broadcasted on the radio and he feels lots of anxiety because he thought he would become the next Rachel. After it was broadcasted Ronson was met with lots of positive feedback for using rational thinking, which got him over his anxiety. David has lots of weird moments such as when he thinks he is the Messiah, talks about 9/11 holograms and about July 7. Charlotte Scott wanted to interview interesting people but didnt want to interview people "too" psychopathic.
   I found these two chapters really interesting and confusing at the same time. I found it interesting how in chapter 8 David Shayler makes a lot of analogies to the play "Waiting for Godot". This play I read before and it shows how two men continuously wait for "Godot"  to come and David uses it to explain how people wait for things that never come. The book also in reviews has been argued to be like it should be called "Waiting for God" and I find this interesting because of the way David acts like he is a "Messiah" at one point. However, this really confused me because I was confused with who was telling whos story because Charlotte I think was telling the story about Rachel and David the whole time. However, very interesting chapters overall!