Talk:David Keirsey

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]

Please rate the article and, if you wish, leave comments here regarding your assessment or the strengths and weaknesses of the article.
WikiProject California This article is part of WikiProject California, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page to join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.


Contents

[edit] Biology is a Behavioral Science?

[edit] Temperament traits cause mental illness?

Commentary removed from article: He believes also that boys with intuitive and perceiving (*N*P) traits would be frequently mis-diagnosed as having the attention deficite disorder AD(H)D, ignoring that an AD(H)D condition could well be regarded as the cause of an *N*P temperament.

[edit] This is the last straw

This is the last straw. It is obvious that every person publishing anything regarding controversies concerning adhd and psychiatry on this website are blatantly injecting thier points of view and it makes me sick. I will never ever use wikipedia again, it is completely unprofessional and misleading.

Your commentary is completely unproffesional (though unlikely to mislead or otherwise impress upon anyone), Mr. Mystery (you failed to sign your post). David Keirsey does not attack the entire profession of psychiatry, but merely the glaringly obvious overuse (and abuse) of clinical drugs to treat situations which could, with much better effects, be dealt with in a psychological manner. ADHD and ADD are very prominent examples, since the administration of drugs has not really been shown to improve the 'symptoms' of this ill-defined 'disorder', and yet psychological analysis of the individual aimed at reforming their habits HAS been shown to be markedly reliable. Although of course it all depends upon the decisions of the particular individual, in the end. Why do you rail against the idea that ADHD and ADD are commonly misdiagnosed? What is your personal agenda? Have you made a dogmatic belief system out of the idea that Ritalin and/or other drugs are THE treatment for these 'disorders'? David W. Keirsey is known as one of the top psychologists with regard to personality types and temperaments, worldwide. Matthew A.J.י.B. 01:52, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Stimulants are one of the few classes of medications to be regarded as both safe and effective in the the treatment of symptoms in a mental disorder. There is a wide body of clinical evidence that supports this. Keirsey would do well to stay away from the language of the Anti-Psychiatry movement which is clearly biased and lacking any sort of scientific creditbility. Some of his past writings may weigh heavily on his reputation. --Scuro 04:40, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Scuro obviously likes to make statements that are patently false, and most likely has a personal agenda in promoting stimulants (much like a drug pusher). There are plenty of cases where prolonged use of proscribed stimulants have played havoc with a person's life. Pill pushing has no "scientific" basis either -- no one can say what happens to the brain long-term when given neurotransmitter effecting chemicals. Dr. Keirsey personally knew individuals that had been damaged by institutional (school) sanctioned drugging.


Oh yes, the ancedotal story as proof of a viewpoint. Name calling also gives one credibility.

Here is the Surgeon General's report card on theraputic stimulants. http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/library/mentalhealth/chapter3/images/fig3_2.jpg --Scuro 14:25, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Scuro does not understand much. His scientific evidence is pretty lame: a government report, I can't think of anything more unscientific than a government report. It looks like a committee's subjective grades of psychopharmalogical drugs. Probably the same quality of the DSM IV: mostly bunk. One might ask oneself what the report means by "long-term safety" -- did they do a long term study to determine this, how can they determine "safety." Why do some kids on Ritalin, make money selling their drugs for others to get high? Name calling-- ok, Scuro is a legal drug pusher or a shill for the drug companies. A Spade is a Spade.


I believe everyone here needs to look back and realize what is going on here. We are not publishing point of view papers, then why are we arguing about point of view. Unfortunatly Scuro, although badly worded in some areas, which I will do my best to fix, most of what is said in that paragraph is truth, it is true that Keirsey advocates that point of view. This is not a forum for you to argue with him, I doubt very much that he is looking. Brynstick 15:26, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

I have gone over the controverted paragraph, making sure that every time a fact was stated it was preceded by "Keirsey thinks". Feel free to comment but, although you may argue with his opinion, I don't see how anyone could disagree with this article. Dr. Keirsey does say this stuff. Brynstick 15:34, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

I just finished reading one of Keirsey's own articles about ADHD/ADD, which really got under my skin! (I'm a happily medicated and functional ADHDer.) That being said, although there are possibly a couple sentences in the ADHD Controversy section that might betray a slight pro-Keirsey bias, I'm satisfied with its overall NPOV tone. Since no one has added anything here in several months, I'm taking down the NPOV tag. Hope you all agree with me. Grease Bandit 23:25, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] innapropriate

It is innappropriate and biased to cite this(removed portion)