PT's loss! Neuroscience IS complex, and those who write in jargon and obscurities are often just protecting their own position, or trying to make themselves look cleverer. It is a far higher, greater skill to make the complexities simple to understand. Nobody has time to get a degree in neuroscience in order to read an article. We all just want it served up on a way that we can understand and DO something with it (IE: YOUR way! 😊)
Wow - how rude - PT could do with some training in “tact and diplomacy” - I obviously have brainpower of a 7 year old as I am loving your book and your podcasts Loretta - I look forward to interviewing you for the Tribe Sober podcast later this week - let’s help alcohol dependent people to build a more healthy neural pathway 🤓🎧💕
The thing is, I am a recent discoverer of your books and site. This has revolutionized my life. I truly believed that there was no answer for my ptsd from childhood. I am free for the first time in 76 years. Once I understood that my reactions were fake caused by chemicals, I could ignore them and get on with life. Such joy. Thank you.
The PT response has reptile brain written all over it. This is someone who is fearful. If you continue to use simple language that people understand, the scientists will be needed less. The rudeness is the evidence imho.
I have already subscribed to your new Substack blog, it is outrageous to see the attitude that PsychologyToday has had with you, it is a sample of the economic and dark interests that for them and for many organizations in the world are more important than people.
You have my full support, Loretta, I have been researching human behavior for many years and knowing you and your message is the best thing that has happened to me, for me what you teach us has a huge scientific basis.
Do not worry the great geniuses, as you comment in your books, they had, have and will have the opposition of old-fashioned and closed-minded scientists who saw their "status" in danger.
A big hug from Spain and thanks for everything you share with us.
Hola, Loretta!!
Ya me he suscrito a tu nuevo blog de Substack, es indignante ver la actitud que ha tenido PsychologyToday contigo, es una muestra de los intereses económicos y oscuros que para ellos y para muchas organizaciones del mundo son más importantes que las personas.
Tienes mi total apoyo, Loretta, llevo muchos años investigando el comportamiento humano y conocerte a ti y a tu mensaje es lo mejor que me ha pasado, para mí lo que nos enseñas tiene una base científica enorme.
No te preocupes los grandes genios, tal y como comentas en tus libros, tuvieron, tienen y tendrán la oposición de los científicos anticuados y de mente cerrada que veían peligrar su “status”.
Un enorme abrazo desde España y gracias por todo lo que compartes con nosotros
All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident...Arthur Schopenhauer You're the Best Loretta! Thank you for your life's work.
Dear Loretta, your books changed my life, my understanding of my self. I stopped complaining and got on with noticing how much I have and how blessed I am. And I got to work making my life even better. Your work helped me understand why people act the way they do, and how to navigate this world. To sum it up, your work had been invaluable to me. Thank you so much and please keep spreading the word. I am always looking for new insights from you!!!
Here's my initial impression. I know more about other types of science, aspects of Physics, which I believe you have close resources to help review my belief. I'm thinking about Psych Today living in a world of "Classical Mechanics", perhaps best described by Sir Isaac Newton, whose individual contribution stopped circa 1726. Other scientists added to the discussion, and as time passed, in 1905, Albert Einstein published several groundbreaking, scientific papers. These became the basis for Einstein's thought that the laws of "Classical Mechanics" could no longer be reconciled with those of the electromagnetic field. In short, given the "relativistic changes" in how Einstein reinterpreted the physical world, Newton would have been unable to easily comprehend what Einstein had discovered due to the "limited notions" of Classical Mechanics. People who have been used to looking at things in a certain way often find it difficult to quickly comprehend a fresh viewpoint . It is AWFULLY difficult to understand something when lack of "tact and diplomacy" do not allow for enlightening discussion to occur. Your work describes the brain using different language, perhaps concepts which require a reimagining of the science. This may or may not be analogous to classical vs advanced theories in physics and quantum mechanics, but I am confident that an editor at Psych Today would improve his Journal if he/she/it took the time to better comprehend the notion of "Happy Chemicals" described in an article dated circa Valentine's Day 2012, in Psych Today, about a book which he/she/it should read and not be afraid to ask questions. Quod erat demonstrandum? IMHO.
My thoughts: 1) The reviewer seemed unprofessional to me, and I was irritated by how they seemed to treat you. It felt like someone in my "tribe" was under attack. 2) I really admire your work and have found it helpful for self-improvement, but I do agree with some of the substance of the review. I think that your simplified presentation of neuroscience works well in a self-improvement setting, but I can see how it wouldn't be effective for all audiences/settings. 3) If I am being completely honest, I don't think this article was as clear/helpful to me as your other articles have been. 4) I think your strongest contribution is teaching people how to think about behavior and motivation through the lens of evolutionary psychology. I don't think the value of your work hinges on any of us being able to describe the exact mechanics in neuroscience.
Lastly, I'm just sorry that you received that review in the way it was written. That would raise my hackles and make me instantly feel defensive (which I did feel on your behalf).
I love your work, Loretta, keep it up! I've recently read Habits of A Happy Brain and the one on anxiety. They have been life-changing for me. Thank you.
"Dopamine for the chase, serotonin from the catch." I find professor's Bruening's blog: Your Neurochemical Self to be the most useful and helpful one. I've learned more it than another other one: www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/your-neurochemical-self
Thank you Dr Bruening,
Markus Youssef
Complier of the therapy quotes collections, 1001 Windmills of the Mind
I welcome your thoughts.
PT's loss! Neuroscience IS complex, and those who write in jargon and obscurities are often just protecting their own position, or trying to make themselves look cleverer. It is a far higher, greater skill to make the complexities simple to understand. Nobody has time to get a degree in neuroscience in order to read an article. We all just want it served up on a way that we can understand and DO something with it (IE: YOUR way! 😊)
Wow - how rude - PT could do with some training in “tact and diplomacy” - I obviously have brainpower of a 7 year old as I am loving your book and your podcasts Loretta - I look forward to interviewing you for the Tribe Sober podcast later this week - let’s help alcohol dependent people to build a more healthy neural pathway 🤓🎧💕
The thing is, I am a recent discoverer of your books and site. This has revolutionized my life. I truly believed that there was no answer for my ptsd from childhood. I am free for the first time in 76 years. Once I understood that my reactions were fake caused by chemicals, I could ignore them and get on with life. Such joy. Thank you.
The PT response has reptile brain written all over it. This is someone who is fearful. If you continue to use simple language that people understand, the scientists will be needed less. The rudeness is the evidence imho.
Hi Loretta !!
I have already subscribed to your new Substack blog, it is outrageous to see the attitude that PsychologyToday has had with you, it is a sample of the economic and dark interests that for them and for many organizations in the world are more important than people.
You have my full support, Loretta, I have been researching human behavior for many years and knowing you and your message is the best thing that has happened to me, for me what you teach us has a huge scientific basis.
Do not worry the great geniuses, as you comment in your books, they had, have and will have the opposition of old-fashioned and closed-minded scientists who saw their "status" in danger.
A big hug from Spain and thanks for everything you share with us.
Hola, Loretta!!
Ya me he suscrito a tu nuevo blog de Substack, es indignante ver la actitud que ha tenido PsychologyToday contigo, es una muestra de los intereses económicos y oscuros que para ellos y para muchas organizaciones del mundo son más importantes que las personas.
Tienes mi total apoyo, Loretta, llevo muchos años investigando el comportamiento humano y conocerte a ti y a tu mensaje es lo mejor que me ha pasado, para mí lo que nos enseñas tiene una base científica enorme.
No te preocupes los grandes genios, tal y como comentas en tus libros, tuvieron, tienen y tendrán la oposición de los científicos anticuados y de mente cerrada que veían peligrar su “status”.
Un enorme abrazo desde España y gracias por todo lo que compartes con nosotros
Keep going with your beautiful work. Your truth shines radiantly.
All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident...Arthur Schopenhauer You're the Best Loretta! Thank you for your life's work.
Dear Loretta, your books changed my life, my understanding of my self. I stopped complaining and got on with noticing how much I have and how blessed I am. And I got to work making my life even better. Your work helped me understand why people act the way they do, and how to navigate this world. To sum it up, your work had been invaluable to me. Thank you so much and please keep spreading the word. I am always looking for new insights from you!!!
Here's my initial impression. I know more about other types of science, aspects of Physics, which I believe you have close resources to help review my belief. I'm thinking about Psych Today living in a world of "Classical Mechanics", perhaps best described by Sir Isaac Newton, whose individual contribution stopped circa 1726. Other scientists added to the discussion, and as time passed, in 1905, Albert Einstein published several groundbreaking, scientific papers. These became the basis for Einstein's thought that the laws of "Classical Mechanics" could no longer be reconciled with those of the electromagnetic field. In short, given the "relativistic changes" in how Einstein reinterpreted the physical world, Newton would have been unable to easily comprehend what Einstein had discovered due to the "limited notions" of Classical Mechanics. People who have been used to looking at things in a certain way often find it difficult to quickly comprehend a fresh viewpoint . It is AWFULLY difficult to understand something when lack of "tact and diplomacy" do not allow for enlightening discussion to occur. Your work describes the brain using different language, perhaps concepts which require a reimagining of the science. This may or may not be analogous to classical vs advanced theories in physics and quantum mechanics, but I am confident that an editor at Psych Today would improve his Journal if he/she/it took the time to better comprehend the notion of "Happy Chemicals" described in an article dated circa Valentine's Day 2012, in Psych Today, about a book which he/she/it should read and not be afraid to ask questions. Quod erat demonstrandum? IMHO.
My thoughts: 1) The reviewer seemed unprofessional to me, and I was irritated by how they seemed to treat you. It felt like someone in my "tribe" was under attack. 2) I really admire your work and have found it helpful for self-improvement, but I do agree with some of the substance of the review. I think that your simplified presentation of neuroscience works well in a self-improvement setting, but I can see how it wouldn't be effective for all audiences/settings. 3) If I am being completely honest, I don't think this article was as clear/helpful to me as your other articles have been. 4) I think your strongest contribution is teaching people how to think about behavior and motivation through the lens of evolutionary psychology. I don't think the value of your work hinges on any of us being able to describe the exact mechanics in neuroscience.
Lastly, I'm just sorry that you received that review in the way it was written. That would raise my hackles and make me instantly feel defensive (which I did feel on your behalf).
I love your work, Loretta, keep it up! I've recently read Habits of A Happy Brain and the one on anxiety. They have been life-changing for me. Thank you.
"Dopamine for the chase, serotonin from the catch." I find professor's Bruening's blog: Your Neurochemical Self to be the most useful and helpful one. I've learned more it than another other one: www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/your-neurochemical-self
Thank you Dr Bruening,
Markus Youssef
Complier of the therapy quotes collections, 1001 Windmills of the Mind
Loretta-Your work has been extremely helpful to me and I’m sure many others .
It’s unfortunate your research and observations of our nervous system and challenging chemical effects in our thinking process has been so challenged.
Not long ago many considered our world flat.
Our relationship with the invisible needs your voice.
Much gratitude.
Wow this is harsh. Take what’s valid and return/release the rest ( the petulant, personal and emotional belong to the reviewer).
Woke Psych Today doesn't deserve you!