During an interview here, the silver-haired interviewer (Joe Boyle?) asked Mark Regev a question about Israel's response to the kidnapping of one of its soldiers, and promptly interrupted the response, demanding facetiously to know how the conflict could possibly become any worse.
Regev supplied a clear explanation, but the question left me wondering if this is the first conflict the interviewer, or—more likely—his controller have ever seen.
Good grief, transparent bias is one thing, stupid questions are another.
As to the unfortunate soldier, Hamas has yet to take credit and crow its victory. No doubt they will wait until they are thoroughly defeated, and then try to use the poor lad as a bargaining chip.
(PS, Sadly, the soldier was killed during the attack and Hamas spoke the truth, for once.)
Friday, August 1, 2014
Elizabeth Loftus and False Testimony Syndrome
Any clinician who has observed a patient retrieve a genuine repressed memory is aware of the difference between the brain's handling of traumatic memories versus episodic memories that were not so ego-threatening as to require dissociative coping strategies.
"In "Remembering Dangerously," Loftus warns that "supposedly de-repressed" memories could "trivialize the genuine memories of abuse and increase the suffering of real victims who wish and deserve, more than anything else, just to be believed" (1995, p. 29)." source.
Unfortunately, Elizabeth Loftus, whose "research" induced her to testify against apparently real victims in favour of alleged perpetrators, did genuine victims much more harm than "supposedly de-repressed" memories.
"Learning of Loftus' article, in 1995, Hoult filed a professional ethics complaint against Loftus with the American Psychological Association ("APA") alleging that Loftus misrepresented the facts of Hoult v. Hoult in "Remembering Dangerously." Within a month of the filing of that complaint, and before the APA began its investigation, Loftus resigned from the APA by email. Her resignation revoked the organization's jurisdiction over the matter, thereby barring any investigation." Jennifer Hoult's critique of Loftus' article.
"In "Remembering Dangerously," Loftus warns that "supposedly de-repressed" memories could "trivialize the genuine memories of abuse and increase the suffering of real victims who wish and deserve, more than anything else, just to be believed" (1995, p. 29)." source.
Unfortunately, Elizabeth Loftus, whose "research" induced her to testify against apparently real victims in favour of alleged perpetrators, did genuine victims much more harm than "supposedly de-repressed" memories.
"Learning of Loftus' article, in 1995, Hoult filed a professional ethics complaint against Loftus with the American Psychological Association ("APA") alleging that Loftus misrepresented the facts of Hoult v. Hoult in "Remembering Dangerously." Within a month of the filing of that complaint, and before the APA began its investigation, Loftus resigned from the APA by email. Her resignation revoked the organization's jurisdiction over the matter, thereby barring any investigation." Jennifer Hoult's critique of Loftus' article.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)