57020 réponses à ce sujet

[kromify]

i almost didn't recognise you shorts!

Modifié par kromify, 02 juillet 2011 - 05:48 .

[CulturalGeekGirl]

eyeofhorus87 wrote...

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...
A shocking... shocking amount of psychology is just "let's try this and see if it makes them better. No? Ok, try something else." There are a number of psychologcal dugs in widespread use that we have no real idea how or why they work. It's basically Dr. House on steroids. Did you know that sometimes the only way to determine which disorder someone actually has is to feed him all the pills and see which one actually ends up working? Yes I am exaggerating for comedic effect, but only slightly... only slightly. This is one of the reasons I love the social sciences... at this point most of the physical sciences are just very difficult math, or measuring and cataloguing minute differences, or doing elaborate and exacting experiments... things that I don't have an exceptional aptitude for. I'm not going to ever be a revolutionary chemist, I just don't have the numbers. 96th percentile in math will get you a big bag of 'not good enough' in some of the higher sciences. But we don't even know what SHAPE most of human sexuality is! Is dominance and submissiveness hardwired, or is it culturally imprinted? Nobody's even started to look at that, and that's... literally insane. I could come up with a comprehensive Kinsey style survey on cultural norms in sexuality in like six hours, and it wouldn't require that much math until the analytical stage (note: if you funded me to do this, I promise to spend more than six hours on it). The main problems are funding and ethics... but when you're screwing with your not-quite-human boyfriend's head, you don't need funding or ethics! Ahahahahahaha! I will do science to it. Ahem, Sorry, sorry. You need some ethics, I'm sure.

While determining whether or not they're seperate in conception or fact is a good start, it's not even vital to guess right, though I think it is important to figure out how he percieves them, and whether this perception actually changes from moment to moment, or whether how he explains it is simply changing. Whether or not he can be spoken with productively while he glows blue is more important, and speaking with him in the fade may be useful too (though I appreciate the increased challenge of doing without that.) The point is to try things and check in to see if all aspects, percieved or real, of the whole person are improving or not.

Sorry I realise I've pulled this thread back a couple of pages here (it moves way too fast for me to keep up with!). I don't from a scientific perspective think that it would be a good idea to 'check in to see if all aspects, percieved or real, of the whole person are improving or not'. Things could go backwards instead of getting better if you do the wrong thing. You can't start with a blank slate each time. Would you risk making someone worse?

Whatever you tried before will affect what you do in the future, so even if you try somethign and it appears to work you would never know why it did and whether it will remain that way.

I guess this is why I don't like most psychology, I have  been to a counseller and it was one of the worst experiences of my life. If you don't know the answers, please don't try and mess with my head and go with gut instincts. I honestly feel the counselling made things worse. I do think it is better to leave well alone than to try guessing games with people. I think what bothers me the most about psychology is it seems very 'jack of all trades' to me. You wouldn't want a heart surgeon operating on your kidneys, yet in psychology generally the NHS offers one or two counsellers in an area who seem to deal with everything.

However, I do love science far too much and the only psychologists I like are the ones doing experiments on the brain and look at testable hypotheses. Which even I know is not how medicine always works, many things get cured by a mistake rather than research, so... I guess it could work but I personally wouldn't take the risk of making someone worse. 

However, as someone who works at a science funding council maybe I could sneakily fund your research on human sexuality

I've had this tab open for days, knowing what I wanted to write in it but not having the brainfocus to put it together well enough. This morning I decided to either do a writeup or close the tab, so here I am necroing the necro.

Also, sorry to serious up th JAndthany pages, but hey... what am I for if not overanalytical walls of text?

The chief worry here seems to be that trying to help someone might make it worse unless you know for sure what you're doing, and that's too dangerous to risk.

Everything that happens in someone's life is stimuli that will garner a response. The difference between a therapist and some random stimuli is that the therapist should be actually paying attention to the response, and altering their behavior accordingly. Nobody is ever a blank slate past infancy, so yes, while psychotherapy can screw someone up, so can living... in fact living is what probably screwed them up in the first place. And we can tell in Dragon Age that leaving Anders alone isn't going to help him, either. Life will keep happening to him, and not in a good way because that guy has like zero coping mechanisms at this point.

It sounds like you had a bad experience with a counselor, and I'm sorry that that happened. The thing is, not all counselors are the same. Some are terrible jerks. Some are awesome. A lot of people who deal with councilors don't realize this. They think of a therapist just like any other doctor: you usually don't have to try out five podiatrists to find one who works with your particular feet, rather you just go to the first one and trust that he knows what he's doing, because all podiatrists theoretically have the same skills. That's not true with therapy, since your people skills are a substantial part of your skillset, and everyone has different people skills. Some people want a grim authority figure to tell them what's wrong. Some people need someone kind and warm. Others need someone confrontational and challenging. Also, if your podiatrist turns out to be a jerk, he can probably still fix your feet; that's not as likely to be true for the psych person.

Contributing to this issue is the required emotional distance. One of the central "rules" of modern psychotherapy is that you can't become friends with your patients outside the office, let alone romantically involved with them. I get that: a psychologist has access to all your secrets, and a lot of hidden levers inside your head, and you have little-to-no access to theirs. Such a friendship would, almost by definition, be incredibly unequal. So the rule makes sense, but it also leads to a situation where therapists have to maintain some level of emotional distance. The problem is that this channels a lot of really friendly and empathetic people away from the therapy business, or into child psychology (I myself was definitely headed in that direction when I was still in the field.) I remember a relative of mine once talked about being deeply hurt by how cold her pscyhologist acted after she stopped seeing him, but that coldness is almost a built-in job requirement. When this conversation was active, people we're saying that they didn't know how well Anders would do in standard talk therapy, and this is part of why: there are a bunch of rules in place for standard counseling that prevent you from getting "too close," but I don't think Anders would respond well to someone he doesn't already trust and care for.

This next bit is something I usually avoid talking about, but it's directly relevant in this case, and also it's you guys I'm talking to, so what the hell. A few years ago at a social gathering, a friend of mine cornered me to thank me: he told me that, many years ago, when we were both in college, I'd prevented him from committing suicide, and now he was happily married and his life was pretty great. Now, back in college, I knew he was depressed, he hated therapy and said medication didn't work, but I didn't think he was serious when he talked about killing himself. Still, sometimes he'd come see me and we'd stay up all night talking about things. I'd make him tell me why he was considering killing himself, I gave him Death: The High Cost of Living to read, and I'd yell at him to stop being stupid and remind him that he liked stuff in his life and had friends. And despite the fact that he was sort of creepy and wouldn't stop hitting on me, I'd always talk to him if he was in trouble. And yes, I was playing baby shaman psychologist pixie girl, I've got no shame about that, I just didn't actually think I was playing for all the marbles. But I'm kind of glad that I was young and dumb and full of hubris, because if I hadn't been, it's possible that nobody would have helped him at all.

Now, all that brain impulses and brain chemistry stuff, that's important. And meds, meds are important a lot of the time, too. But sometimes what's necessary is just someone to talk and listen and make you think about why you're thinking about things... and that's a role that can be filled by a therapist or a friend. We have so many unanswered questions aobut Anders, and it's largely because nobody ever bloody asks him about anything below the surface. When I say that psychology is largely about trying things and seeing if they work, I don't mean we're literally throwing science at the wall to see what sticks. It's as much about listening as it is about talking, and if you're any good at your job the person you're helping will tell you what they need, or at the very least they'll tell you what they think they need and you can go from there. Talking with someone is gathering data, it's just that the synthesis of that data is a kind of pattern recognition that humans excel at, and that we haven't yet invented instruments to measure.

But there's another thing that a lot of people need too, and it's something that therapy doesn't and can't provide, beause of the rules: the feeling that someone likes you, and values you, and will be there for you no matter what. Hawke sort of tries to do that last bit, but fails at it miserably. Anders is half-convinced throughout the game that Hawke only likes him because he's fooled her, because she doesn't really understand what he is and what he will do, and when he finally snaps he'll hurt her. She tries to help by telling him he isn't going to snap, telling him that he's a good person and that she loves him, which may seem like all he needs, but it isn't. Because that puts more pressure on him: she believes he won't lose control or do something that hurts her, but he still believes that such a lapse in inevitable. Before Hawke, the threat of going mad or going too far was his problem, and his problem alone. Now if he fails, he's not just failing himself, he's failing Hawke, too.

As for what Anders actually needs; well, to find that out, someone has to actually talk to him. They could discuss the realities of his unique situation rather than smiling through them and pretending everything will be ok. It might dull the hyperexaggerated optimistic enthusiasm about the romance but, well... good. Saying "Hurrah, love will conquer all!" just sets everyone up for a crushing disappointment if it doesn't.

The whole thing is massively frustrating. Still, it has given me some interesting perspective. Perhaps Hawke never tries to really help because she lacks the skills and the hubris to believe she could.

[kromify]

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...

i needed a sledgehammer to "snip" that wall  

therapists give the best kind of love, or at least they should. to be totally vulnerable in front of someone and have all your emotions laid bare - and be accepted for who you are. the romances and friendly hugs can be nice but next to useless as a long term therapy.

if it goes both ways you might even have a pretty good relationship!!  

[kromify]

all's quiet on the western front!?


*schoolmissy voice*  now lets take a look at some of our queens artistry, shall we?

[Melca36]

SurelyForth wrote...

As much as I love Anders, I don't see BW giving him that much more game time, if any at all. He was pretty much the most important character in DA2 and a prominent character in Awakening. Unless Hawke is the protagonist in DA3, I can't imagine him showing up to help yet another hero. Especially since he's probably mostly dead.

I think we will probably get some interesting codexes in DA:3 and it will be according to your decision on whether you let him live or die.

I'd love to see Carver as a companion where he mentions his sister disappearing with Anders if you chose that route or disappearing after she killed the love of her life.

[beckaliz]

Is it just my perception, or does it seem like there are more key variables that DA3 will have to take into account than Mass Effect? It seems likely to me that there will be a different protagonist, but, I mean, we've all fallen in love with either our Hawke or Warden or both, and... I guess it's being spoiled on having Shepard around for all ME games that has me feeling slighted.

I also put my bid in that Anders is going to be reduced to either a brief cameo or a codex entry. Hopefully we can find another boyo to love as much.

[YamiSnuffles]

Although it would be kind of nice to see Hawke again, I would settle for an expansion if it was well done (that is, most of your old companions were still around). I say this primarily because of Anders. If Hawke continued on, I feel like s/he would have be separated from Anders if in a romance with him. To that I would have to say- not cool. At least with all the Origins LIs I could feel like they might be okay if the Warden went somewhere with out them for a bit. For Mr. Sparklefingers McCrazypants, I think if Hawke decided to just go adventuring and leave him somewhere, he'd end up dead in a ditch somewhere or blow some **** up.

So they can go ahead and make a new protagonist. Then we can find someone new to love. And have new companions to love or have old ones come back for bigger roles. Anders has done what he needs to do. If he's alive, let him go be crazy with Hawke somewhere and live on as a legend/the new Andraste/some other crazy thing.

kromify wrote...

*schoolmissy voice*  now lets take a look at some of our queens artistry, shall we?
-snip-

*blushes*

[ipgd]

The amount of people outside this thread who fundamentally misunderstand practically every aspect of Anders's character is absolutely staggering and I think this personal mission I have undertaken to enlighten each and every one of them is going to be the death of me.

[upsettingshorts]

ipgd wrote...

The amount of people outside this thread who fundamentally misunderstand practically every aspect of Anders's character is absolutely staggering and I think this personal mission I have undertaken to enlighten each and every one of them is going to be the death of me.

He's boring.  And ruined.  And doesn't change permanently.  It's just his mood. 

YOU JUST AREN'T CONSIDERING HIS WHOLE CHARACTER!

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 03 juillet 2011 - 12:17 .

[SurelyForth]

ipgd wrote...

The amount of people outside this thread who fundamentally misunderstand practically every aspect of Anders's character is absolutely staggering and I think this personal mission I have undertaken to enlighten each and every one of them is going to be the death of me.

This is why I don't venture out much. I get legitimately ragey about it and...that's not good, right?

[upsettingshorts]

That's why I decide to fanboy out over silly characters. It's far more relaxing.

I just hope I don't run in to my suspicious spouse...

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 03 juillet 2011 - 12:19 .

[SurelyForth]

When I chose to fangirl Anders, he was a silly character (kinda)! I thought he'd be fairly safe.

I was fairly wrong.

[highcastle]

YamiSnuffles wrote...

Although it would be kind of nice to see Hawke again, I would settle for an expansion if it was well done (that is, most of your old companions were still around). I say this primarily because of Anders. If Hawke continued on, I feel like s/he would have be separated from Anders if in a romance with him. To that I would have to say- not cool. At least with all the Origins LIs I could feel like they might be okay if the Warden went somewhere with out them for a bit. For Mr. Sparklefingers McCrazypants, I think if Hawke decided to just go adventuring and leave him somewhere, he'd end up dead in a ditch somewhere or blow some **** up.

So they can go ahead and make a new protagonist. Then we can find someone new to love. And have new companions to love or have old ones come back for bigger roles. Anders has done what he needs to do. If he's alive, let him go be crazy with Hawke somewhere and live on as a legend/the new Andraste/some other crazy thing.

This pretty much sums up my feelings. And I adore Hawke. But considering the nature of Anders' character, I don't think it would be in-character for him to be separated if friendmanced. And since it seems a small fraction of players actually went this route, I don't foresee them bringing Anders back as a full-fledged companion. However, I could get on board if he's at least in the game. Like chillaxing at Hawke's home-base all the time. They can even handwave it by saying he doesn't trust himself to use magic on account of Justice, or that he's hiding out. Something. But throw in a couple conversations that acknowledge he's still around and in a relationship and I'd be satisfied.

I remember being pretty POed about Zevran's lack of anything in DAA after his whole, "You caught me, now you're stuck with me" line. It didn't seem like he'd be one to separate, either. Anders is even more extreme in this. I don't see him trusting himself at all without Hawke around, and I know my Hawke wouldn't be comfortable with Anders out of his sight.

[ipgd]

I apparently only fangirl over things at least half the people I meet vehemently despise which makes my life very difficult.

[LT123]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

That's why I decide to fanboy out over silly characters. It's far more relaxing.

I just hope I don't run in to my suspicious spouse...

:happy: Don't worry, the Spirit Monk's got your back. And you don't have to come back from bun deliveries, right?

I think the more plot-central a character is, the more fun they are to geek out over. There's more to discuss about Anders than, say, about Isabela or Fenris, simply because those two are optional characters. That's in terms of "what does this character do or add to in the story," disregarding factors like whether they're a LI or not, their appeareance, how to set up their tactics, etc. 

Modifié par LT123, 03 juillet 2011 - 12:44 .

[Toastyblue2]

Giggles_Manically wrote...

Quoted for awesome, because I was gone all day and missed the Oblivion love.

I'd like to think that the Chantry exploded, Sheogorath cheered, toasted some marshmellows, threatened to kill Anders and have his brain bronzed for posterity, and then handed Hawke a boquet of freshly picked asparagus.

Also: rule 34 @ Sheograth and Flemeth.

Edited for:

ipgd wrote...

I apparently only fangirl over things at
least half the people I meet vehemently despise which makes my life very
difficult.

Oh, I hear you. Happens to me all the time. Happened to me in the Warcraft fandom and in the Harry Potter fandom.

Or I fangirl over a rare pair.

I thought I'd be alone in my Anders-fangirling.

Modifié par Toastyblue2, 03 juillet 2011 - 12:50 .

[SurelyForth]

Toastyblue...holy crap, how nuch do I want to write a conversation between Sheogorath and Flemeth?

Modifié par SurelyForth, 03 juillet 2011 - 12:51 .

[Toastyblue2]

SurelyForth wrote...

Toastyblue...holy crap, how nuch do I want to write a conversation between Sheogorath and Flemeth?

DO IT DO IT DO IT.

*cough*

[upsettingshorts]

LT123 wrote...


I think the more plot-central a character is, the more fun they are to geek out over. There's more to discuss about Anders than, say, about Isabela or Fenris, simply because those two are optional characters.

She may be optional, but please do not relegate poor Isabela to the same level of disappointing plot irrelevance as Fenris.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 03 juillet 2011 - 12:56 .

[beckaliz]

Sometimes people can't understand and refuse to tolerate anyone with any amount of true inner turmoil. I know that's a generalization. But I think the other companions mostly struggle against the world around them and not with themselves. Even Fenris blames his anger issues purely on Denarius & Co. and, to me, doesn't really take responsibility for them. Anders feels genuine remorse and regret right from the get-go on what he's done with Justice, and a lot if the time he's questioning who and what he is.

Anders hates himself. He struggles with his obsessive side and his desires for some semblance of happiness and normalcy even though he knows he'll never really achieve it.

It's very sad. If someone has never felt anything like he has, or lacks a certain amount of empathy, they'll never get it.

[ipgd]

Toastyblue2 wrote...

Oh, I hear you. Happens to me all the time. Happened to me in the Warcraft fandom and in the Harry Potter fandom.

Or I fangirl over a rare pair.

I thought I'd be alone in my Anders-fangirling.

I think at least half of the words that have come out of my fingers in the past two decades have been defenses of MGS2, and DA2 is quickly catching up.

I long for the next game to come along which only I seem to like.

[LT123]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

She may be optional, but please do not relegate poor Isabela to the same level of disappointing plot irrelevance as Fenris.

Crap, forgot aboutr the Qunari relic for a second. True. I did my whole first playthrough without Fenris.

[Addai]

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...

Indeed, Anders suffers from Wrex's problem: dead in too many saves... with the added problem of also being despised by many, many people. So it's not really the same as Tali and Garrus, who are both pretty beloved.

*screeching delurk*  People hate Urdnot Wrex?!  What people?  What is their malfunction?

And, the obligatory:  ALL HAIL THE MAD GOD

Modifié par Addai67, 03 juillet 2011 - 02:25 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Addai67 wrote...

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...

Indeed, Anders suffers from Wrex's problem: dead in too many saves... with the added problem of also being despised by many, many people. So it's not really the same as Tali and Garrus, who are both pretty beloved.

*screeching delurk*  People hate Urdnot Wrex?!  What people?  What is their malfunction?

And, the obligatory:  ALL HAIL THE MAD GOD

I had the impression that Wrex is usualy pretty much liked.

Also, Anders is nothing compared to the awesomeness that is Wrex (especially in ME2), imo.

[CulturalGeekGirl]

No no, I was saying he has the "dead in too many saves" problem.

Then I said that the "hated" problem was in addition to that. But hated doesn't matter so much as well... dead does.