Author Archives: Majken Hirche

Kritik af Lars Barfoed: ‘Danskerne skal kende historien.’

Lars Barfoed skriver i Berlingske: ‘Danskerne skal kende historien.’ Barfoeds gennemgående tese er, at danskerne lider et identitetstab, fordi de efter Lars Barfoeds mening ikke kender nok til historien.

Barfoed skriver:

“Havde det eksempelvis ikke været for general Montgomerys snarrådighed – nogle ville måske sige ego – havde den røde hærs panserenheder nået Jylland først, og Danmark ville være fanget bag jerntæppets mørke.”

Lars_Barfoed_460346a Men det er forkert. Den Røde Hær ræsede ikke mod Jylland. Med undtagelse af Bornholm var Danmark ikke en del af USSR’s interessesfære, og det var aldrig meningen, at Danmark skulle besættes af USSR.

Der var på Yalta-konferencen blevet aftalt nogle linjer for besættelsen af Tyskland, som de allierede allerede havde overskredet. De trak senere deres tropper tilbage til den aftalte linje, og USSR tillod USA, UK og Frankrig at komme ind i Berlin. Sovjet overholdt sine aftaler. Det havde intet med Montgomery at gøre.

Har Barfoed selv skrevet sin kronik?

Når man anlægger budskabet “danskerne skal kende historien” og en moraliserende og belærende tone, som Barfoed gør, står man sig bedst ved selv at besidde en stor historisk indsigt. Men spørgsmålet er, om Barfoed vitterligt selv besidder den indsigt, som han giver indtryk af i sin kronik.

Kronikkens indhold og udtryksform er dog påfaldende. Barfoed plejer ikke at være flittig til at anvende historiske referencer i sine taler eller kronikker, som han her gør. I det hele taget er det intellektuelle ikke det, man mest forbinder med Barfoed. Kronikkens sprogbrug, tone og indhold gør det utroværdigt, at Barfoed selv skulle have skrevet den.

Barfoed smed røret på, da han blev spurgt til egen kunnen

Efter at have problematiseret danskernes manglende historiekundskaber på Radio 24syv, blev Barfoed spurgt, hvornår Stavnsbåndet blev ophævet. Ved dette spørgsmål smed Barfoed omgående røret på.

Dette kan lede tankerne hen på en tidligere episode i Danmarks Radios ‘Deadline,’ hvor Barfoed fik vist et billede af konservatismens fader Edmund Burke, men ikke kunne genkende ham.

Så for at sammenfatte:

Lars Barfoed i gårsdagens Berlingske: “Historisk indsigt er … en naturlig grundpille i Det Konservative Folkeparti. Historisk indsigt er en uomgængelig forudsætning for at træffe rationelle beslutninger og samtidig det vigtigste værn mod blåøjet idealisme.”

Lars Barfoed i gårsdagens Radio24syv, da han bliver spurgt, hvornår Stavnsbåndet blev ophævet: Smider røret på.

Lars Barfoed i DR’s Deadline, da han bliver vist et billede af Edmund Burke: Genkender ikke personagen.

Kritik af Henrik Day Poulsens ‘Året hvor patienten bliver taber’

Henrik Day Poulsen afviser læge Peter Gøtzsches kritik af psykiatrien i Berlingske.

Day Poulsen kritiserer Gøtzsche for ikke at være speciallæge i psykiatri og insinuerer, at Gøtzsche derfor ikke ved noget om de ting, han udtaler sig om. Gøtzsche fremlægger imidlertid undersøgelser i sin bog, som Henrik Day Poulsen undlader at forholde sig til i sin kritik. Day Poulsens argumentation er således en arrogant appel til autoritet.

Arrogancen er fejlplaceret: Man behøver ikke være psykiater for at kritisere psykiatrien, akkurat som man ikke behøver være bankmand for at kritisere, hvad der foregik i banksektoren før finanskrisen. Det ville klæde Day Poulsen at fokusere på substansen og forholde sig til undersøgelserne, snarere end afsenderen.

Day Poulsen gendriver kritikken af lykkepiller med personlige anekdoter: “[Gøtzsche] påstår, at ‘lykkepiller’ ikke virker, men han sidder ikke som psykiater eller praktiserende læge, der dagligt oplever, at patienterne … får det markant bedre på antidepressiv medicin,” skriver Poulsen. Han forholder sig ikke til eksempelvis Irving Kirschs bog “The Emperor’s New Drugs” fra 2009. Her fremlægger Kirsch, der i parentes bemærket er Ph.D. i psykologi og lektor på Harvard Universitet, at man med placebo-piller kan opnå 75-82% af samme effekt, som man opnår med lykkepiller.

Day Poulsen karakteriserer endvidere Gøtzsches kritik af psykiatrien og psykofarmika som “paranoid.” Men der er faktisk god grund til at være skeptisk: Da de amerikanske delstater Minnesota og Vermont gjorde det lovpligtigt for medicinalvirksomheder at indberette, hvor mange tjenester, gaver og penge de udstrakte til læger, viste tallene, at psykiatere fik flere penge af medicinalindustrien end alle andre typer speciallæger.

Det er netop ikke tilfældigt, at det lige er psykiatere, som modtager flest penge fra medicinalvirksomhederne. Undersøgelser viser, at samme diagnose behandles vidt forskelligt i psykiatrien. Som den amerikanske psykiater Daniel Carlat (der selv ordinerer psykofarmaka til sine patiener) har sagt om sit fag: “Vores diagnoser er subjektive og udvidelige, og vi har få rationelle grunde til at vælge én diagnose frem for en anden.” Det amerikanske National Institute of Mental Health har ligeledet konstateret, at psykiatri er et mudret område med uklare diagnoser og tests, og at psykiatere således har mulighed for at anvende vidt forskellige behandlingsmetoder på det samme diagnosebillede.

Diagnosemanualen DSM omtales ofte som “psykiatriens bibel.” I en undersøgelse fra 2006 foretaget af L. Cosgrove et al. kom det frem, at 95% af de fagfolk, som var med til at skrive den, havde finansielle bånd til medicinalvirksomhederne. Hvis Day Poulsen vil karakterisere en skepsis over for psykiatrien som “paranoid,” så kunne man omvendt sige, at den, der ikke ser grund til at være skeptisk, har en tiltro til autoritetsfigurer, som visse psykiatere nok ville karakterisere som dependent.

Nietzsche and Buddhist Philosophy

Nietzsche saw Being as a myth at times, but neither the Buddha nor Nagarjuna ever saw Being as a “myth.” Rather, they saw it as a delusion that humans superimpose upon the world. It was Nietzsche, especially the Nietzsche of Twilight of the Idols, who saw Being as a myth.

What Nietzsche and Buddhism do have in common is the tendency to psychologize even static fields of knowledge – to submit even fixed natural laws to introspection, mind, and moods. A major tenet of Buddhist philosophy can be succinctly summed up as a “pre-reflective commitment to substance metaphysics.”

Nietzsche did not believe in a unified subject, but nor did he commit to a complete empirical disentangling of the subject the way the Buddha did. To Buddha, the individual could famously be reduced to elementary-pieces (skadhas). To use an analogy from Zen writer Brad Warner, the skadhas are like a junk heap – remove the pieces of junk, and there’s no heap. Nietzsche would never accept such a degrading perspective for his Overman – he would view it as fraught with nihilism. (And though this is often misunderstood, Nietzsche was indeed an anti-nihilist.)

To Nietzsche, pain and pleasure are a false polarity because in Nietzsche’s thinking, pain is simply the resistance that one must break through when one wishes to exercise acts of power in the world. Similarly, compassion is worthless to Nietzsche, unless it is the compassion of those who are strong. To Nietzsche, weak people who suffer will infect their compassion with their own suffering and thus only make things worse.

Dispositionen for socialistisk moral er medfødt

Saxo Banks Lars Seier Christensen siger i sin nylige tale til The Adam Smith Institute, at uanset hvor mange gange socialismen fejler, så bliver folk ved med at støtte den. Seiers modvægt til problemerne er at søge råd i Ayn Rands filosofi.

Vdr. pointen om, at socialismen altid kommer igen, selv om den fejler og fejler, så har ny forskning fra Jonathan Haidt, Ravi Iyer, Spassena Koleva m.fl. vist, at moralske intuitioner er bestemt af alle mulige andre faktorer end logik. Vi fødes prædisponerede for en given moral, som har det med at passe godt på en given politisk grundholdning. Har man f.eks. en moralsk intuition om lighed og omsorg, så har man det med at finde socialisme tiltalende, uanset hvor mange gange socialismen fejler, og uanset hvor pilråddent det intellektuelle fundament for socialisme er.

Rands argumentation for frihed og kapitalisme som en moralsk position går ud fra, at alle kan få samme moralske intuition som hende, hvis blot de bruger deres rationalitet. Men empirisk set lader det ikke til at være tilfældet. Seier siger det faktisk også selv i sin tale: Han vidste intuitivt, at de ting man finder i Rand, var rigtige, inden han havde læst hende.

Folk, der er prædisponerede for liberalisme, lader til at være den mindste gruppe, solidt overskygget af folk, som er prædisponeret for konservatisme eller socialisme.

Hvis de ovennævnte forskeres forskning er rigtig, så vil der blive ved med at krybe socialistisk moral ud af krogene, uanset hvor mange gange socialismen fejler. Og så er det bedste, liberale kan håbe på, at overbevise socialister om at lade andre folk være i fred.

Difference between ENTP and INTP

Unsure if you are INTP or ISTP? Take the INTP or ISTP Test here.

The difference between ENTP and INTP

One way to look at it is this: They’re very similar, but the INTP’s greatest source of difficulty is interpersonal relations: Relating to others, being polite and socially smooth, gauging the right timing and mood, etc. – all the non-rational stuff that people do to please each other and make each other feel good.

With the ENTPs, the greatest Achilles heel is not so much manners, but conformity. INTPs tend to have little clue about manners and just “learn a script” that they can hide behind because they feel so out of bounds in a world where moods and feelings carry more weight than logical arguments. By contrast, ENTPs tend to have some flair for just when to say the right thing, the pitch, the mood that they are tapping into and so on. Socially, ENTPs don’t learn a script – they improvise and they love stating the same thing in new ways, each bringing out a difference nuance (where INTPs tend to favor the clearest or most correct way of saying something).

As with their dislike of conformity, ENTPs are also terribly impatient and much more disorganized than INTPs. INTPs, when left to their own devices, tend to develop routines where they deal with things in a factual, logical manner. For example, organizing the overall structure of a book is always the hardest thing to do for an ENTP. It’s like they can’t be sure that a given chapter will say the same thing two weeks from now that it says today. Everything changes according to moods. Compared to the ENTPs, INTPs tend to be more stable. With the INTPs it’s the relation to other people that is foremost problematic, it’s like they’re saying “Dear Lord, help me to survive in this world full of people who make no sense,” whereas with the ENTPs it’s more like “Dear Lord, help me to survive this bland conformity of predictable, zombified, unspirited, trite rehashing – give me something that is new.”

Free MBTI JTI Tests in Foreign Languages

The MBTI Personality Test is the world’s most famous personality test. Here is a good free version in different languages:

How the MBTI Test Works: Everyone has a four-letter type code where they are either:

1: Introverted (I) or Extroverted (E)

People who prefer extroversion use their energy by being alone and get energy by being with people. The opposite applies for introverts who get energy by being alone. Extraverts are action oriented, while introverts are thought oriented. Extraverts seek breadth of knowledge and influence, while introverts prefer depth of knowledge and influence.

2: Sensing (S) or Intuitive (N)

Sensing and intuition tells us about how we gather information. This dimension describes how new knowledge and information is perceived. People who prefer sensing (S) rely more on information and data that can be sensed by the five senses. They like data and facts. People who prefer intuition (N) rely more on what is abstract and theoretical, and they are focused on future opportunities.

3: Thinking (T) or Feeling (F)

Thought and feeling is about how people make a decision. Those who prefer thinking (T) make decisions based on what seems reasonable or logical. This is in contrast to those who make decisions based on feeling (F) – these people use empathy and harmony or considering people’s needs relative to the situation.

4: Perceiving (P) or Judging (J)

People with a preference for J appreciate plans with tight deadlines and they do not like surprises in the schedule. They expect that other people carry out tasks on time and are focused on results and objectives. In contrast, people with P-preference do not appreciate discussing plans, and it is often difficult to get them to agree to tight schedules. They are more concerned with the value of the process than the results and objectives.

More about the MBTI Test

The MBTI test is particularly useful in team building and staff development as test subjects’ profiles are mapped. In the context of teamwork, team members’ types can be inserted in a team compass so that an overview of how the team perceives the world and makes decisions can be articulated. Increased knowledge about one’s colleagues’ diversity can often prevent conflicts.

The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) is a personality test that has helped millions of people worldwide gain more insight and understanding of both their own and other people’s behavior. The MBTI test can be a useful tool in various developmental processes, both in relation to individual development as staff development and leadership development, but also in terms of group development. The MBTI test gives an understanding of why we as people respond differently in everyday work situations and under pressure.

Both Jung’s original theory as well as MBTI and JTI and CelebrityTypes is based on observations of the dichotomy, i.e. a contradiction between extraversion and introversion, sensing and intuition, thinking and feeling, judging and perception.
The theory has given rise to some misconceptions, such as thinking types do not have feelings, and feeling types cannot think. This is as wrong as it can be! Everyone has everything, and everyone is okay!

Calvin S. Hall’s Definitions of Jung’s Functions and Types

Extraverted Thinking Type (Te dominant)
This type of man elevates objective thinking into the ruling passion of his life. He is typified by the scientists who devotes his energy to learning as much as he can about the objective world .His goals are understanding natural phenomena, the discovery of natural laws, and theoretical formulations. The most developed type of extraverted thinker is Darwin or Einstein. The extraverted thinker tends to repress teh feeling side of his nature, and so he may appear to others as being impersonal, or even cold and haughty. If the repression is too strict, feeling is forced to find devious and sometimes abnormal ways of affecting his character. He may become autorcratic, bigoted, vain, superstitious, and impervious to criticism. Lacking feeling, the quality of his thinking tends to become sterile and impoverished. The extreme case if the “mad scientist” or the Dr. Jekyll who periodically turns into a psychopathic monster.

C. Extraverted Feeling Type (Fe dominant):
this type, which Jung observes is more frequently found in women, subordinates thinking to feeling. People of this type are apt to be capricious because their feelings change as frequently as the situation changes. Even a slight variance in the situation may cause a change in their feelings. They are gushy, emotional, ostentatious, and moody. They form strong attachments to people, but these attachments are transitory, and love easily turns into hate. Their feelings are fairly conventional, and they readily participate in all the latest fads and fashions. When the thinking function is firmly repressed, the thought processes of the extraverted feeling type are primitive and undeveloped.

Introverted Feeling Type (Fi dominant)
This type is also more commonly found among women. Unlike their extraverted sisters, who parade their emotions, introverted feeling persons keep their feelings hidden from the world. They tend to be silent, inaccessible, indifferent, and inscrutable. They often have an air of melancholy or depression. But they can also give the impression of having inner harmony, repose, and self-sufficiency. They often seem to others to have a mysterious power or charisma. They are people of whom it is said, “Still waters run deep.” Actually, they do have very deep and intense feelings which sometimes erupt in emotional storms, to the astonishment of their relatives and friends.

Introverted Sensation Type (Si dominant):
Like all introverts, the introverted sensation type stsands aloof from external objects immersing himself in his own psychic sensations. He considers the world to be banal and uninteresting in comparison with his inner sensations. He has difficulty expressing himself except through art, but what he produces tends to be devoid of any significance. To others he may appear to be calm, passive, and self-controlled, when actually he is not very interesting because he is deficient in thought and feeling.

Extraverted Intuitive Type (Ne dominant):
People of this type, commonly women, are characterized by flightiness and instability; they jump from situation to situation to discover new possibilities in the external world. They are always looking for new worlds to conquer before they have conquered old ones. Because they are deficient in the thinking function, they cannot diligently pursue their intuitions for very long but must jump to new intuitions. They can render exceptional service as promoters of new enterprises and causes, but they cannot maintain an interest in them. Routine activities bore them; novelty is their life’s sustenance. They tend to fritter away their lives on a succession of intuitions. They are not dependable friends, although they enter into each new relationship wit great zest for the possibilities it holds. As a consequence they unwittingly hurt people by their lack of sustained interest. They take up numerous hobbies but soon get bored with them, and they have difficulty keeping a job

Introverted Intuitive Type (Ni dominant)
The artist is a representative of this type, but it also contains dreamers, prophets, visionaries, and cranks. An introverted intuitive person is often regarded as an enigma by his friends, and as a misunderstood genius by himself. Since he is not in touch with external reality or with conventions, he is unable to communicate effectively with others, even with those of the same type. He is isolated in a world of primordial images whose meaning he does not understand. Like his extraverted counterpart, he jumps from image to image looking for new possibilities in them but never really develops any of his intuitions. Since he is unable to sustain an interest in an image, he cannot, as an introverted thinker does, make any profound contribution to an understanding of psychic processes. He can, however, have brilliant intuitions which others may then build upon and develop.

From: “A primer of Jungian Psychology.”