Although a practicing clinical psychologist for over 30 years, I never joined the largest professional organization in the world, the American Psychological Association. I was not interested in my membership fees supporting lobbying the Government for favors. Now it has come out they’re doing much worse, secretly aiding Government-sanctioned torture:
These authors have little hope of reforming the APA. The interview reveals they are relativists when it come to moral principles. One asserts that without the support of psychologists the governments torture program would have "collapsed" from ethical opposition. This seems to be his relative point of view. The torturers were not looking for ethical support as much as a practical way to improve their torture. And behavioral psychologists are nothing if not practical. The other author is more clear when he states that his goal is to remind psychologists that they agreed to be "dedicated to the public good." The problem is the public doesn't exist in reality and its good can be defined as almost anything beneficial to a group of two or more people. But this relativist attitude is what results when shoulds and musts are eliminated from counseling sessions. This leaves people in organizations like the APA open to any suggestion that has public good associated with it. Like torturing government "enemies" protects the public good. These authors seem to miss this point. Or perhaps they just want to impose their own definition of public good until another "worthy" cause allows for the violation of individual human rights.
ReplyDelete