Wrong,

 

Our usual way of talking is completely wrong. How can it right, if we don’t listen to ourselves while we speak? We have accepted this absurd way of talking against our will for way too long. We don’t even know; this is the root-cause of all the madness that is going on. Disembodied Language (DL) is everywhere, because when we don’t listen to ourselves while we speak, we are unconscious.

 

Embodied Language (EL), in which the speaker listens to him or herself, while he or she speaks, is the only right way of talking, because only in EL are we conscious. The difference between our EL and our DL is the difference between right and wrong. We have never talked about this, because to do so, would require, that we first stop our DL, so that we can have ongoing EL.

 

None of the many problems, which we – with DL – keep saying, are our problems, are actually the problem. Our DL is and has always been the problem and we have yet to acknowledge this. In DL, experts compete for the attention of the listener, the viewer or the reader. It is all about selling books, getting research published, getting an interview or attracting millions of followers on social media, but our EL simply doesn’t work in such a superficial way.

 

For many years – studying, working in mental health and teaching – I was part of psychology, which, so they say, has a credibility-crisis, but as long as the difference between DL and EL hasn’t been acknowledged, as long as our problematic way of talking – DL – hasn’t been scientifically recognized, psychologists keep failing to deliver. The endless bickering and hair-splitting among researchers about methodology, doesn’t make any difference, but the DL/EL distinction certainly would.

 

In the Scientific American, I read, psychology has a healthy willingness to face its problems. This is just not true, because like everyone else, they fight and argue, which means, they engage in DL and not EL. It is funny, because underneath the first sentence of this stupid article, is a drawing of what appears to be humans with see-through brains, which have messy spiraling, squiggly lines, that suggest troubling thoughts. Right underneath this illustration, it says, times are tough for young psychologists.

 

While there is never any problem replicating the enormous difference between DL and EL, there is a replicability and reproducibility crisis in psychology, which has been going on for as long as I can remember. Surely, without EL, this totally unacceptable lack of credibility is never going to be properly addressed, let alone, solved. Moreover, with our superstitious DL, psychology isn’t even a science. All psychologists should be interested – open to evidence – in finding out about the DL/EL distinction, but, like everyone else, they are conditioned to have DL.

 

Nobody wants to acknowledge, the ongoing methodological crisis stemming from failure to replicate many studies, is a problem of human interaction. Until now, science has always only insisted on written scientific language, which is published in peer-reviewed journals, but the obvious need for a spoken scientific language, has been ridiculed or completely ignored. Of course, this is where psychology goes wrong, because it is not at all like physics or chemistry.

 

The cartoonish illustration was also followed by a wrong comment of the author, who said, that a thought had been rattling in his head. Anyone who knows the difference between DL and EL, will have to come to terms with the scientific fact, that there is no language inside of us and therefore, there is no thought, no mind, as this is merely a metaphorical way of speaking about the neurons and neurotransmitters in our head. In other words, language is – always – overt, that is, outside of the human skin, observable, because it is either said, heard, written or read.

 

While there is a lot of talk going on these days about fake-news, conspiracy-theories, hoaxes and plain-old propaganda, psychologists can’t get their act together, as they can’t even seem to agree on the undeniable fact, that the field is in a major crisis. Two camps of, supposedly, very smart people are looking at the exact same data and coming to wildly different conclusions. This is an example of DL, where one speaker tries to outcompete the other. Psychologists must get their head out of their ass and do the right thing instead of the wrong thing. They should be leading by example: stop their own wrong DL, engage in EL - which is the scientifically correct and truly rational way of dealing with language - and deal with the facts.