This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - bu
« on: September 17, 2006, 09:18:58 PM »
In his paper, Freud referred to the contagious and regressive nature of groups described by LeBon and McDougall, but he added the dimension of intrapsychic cathectic shifts that could occur in groups. Freud described the similarity of such groups as the Catholic Church and the army with the hypnotic situation. In all of these situations, there is a leader and one or more followers. The follower obeys the leader and gives up his own superego and ego ideal as he identifies with the leader's superego.
So basically, priests, soldiers, lawyers are brainwashed, cult-duped dicks?
« on: September 17, 2006, 09:14:00 PM »
« on: September 17, 2006, 09:06:58 PM »
"The law" is just some bull invented by people. It's not a legitimate academic field of study, like sociology or philosophy. There are no "right answers." You will learn how to justify any position, no matter how outrageous. You will hear these terms, among many others, until you want to f**cking puke: "public policy considerations," "reasonableness" and "balancing." You will seriously consider questions such as whether or not a four year old can batter an adult woman, without pausing to think about how absurd the question is in the first place. You will jettison any common sense, decency and fair-mindedness you once had and replace it with mechanical, pseudo-intellectual thought processes that do nothing to advance the quality of life in our society. Laws are written and applied arbitrarily. If not, they are applied depending on political considerations. Liberals and conservatives are equally guilty of this. "The law" is nothing more than a set of fictions agreed to by elites -- it is a giant lie.
Indeed, seine, that post is great! I guess the truth couldn't be spoken more eloquently!
« on: September 17, 2006, 09:04:43 PM »
thanx for letting us know, kinkajou ... your post is kinda funny taken into account that is totally unrelated to what was being discussed ..
« on: October 25, 2004, 05:15:02 PM »
Actually, I thought the PhD would make my resume look better for the analyst position - not at the teaching level. I don't understand how this PhD will some how hurt me? Please explain...
« on: October 25, 2004, 03:54:32 PM »
« on: October 25, 2004, 01:51:27 AM »
Well, would you say it's better than just a BA in Econ, or do you think it will just make my resume look really bad because I got my PhD from an unknown online school?
I figure it can only be beneficial. I won't lose any time because I will be working full-time while going to this school, so isn't it a win-win situation?
« on: October 24, 2004, 11:39:46 PM »
It doesn't. I just want some advice from a smart group of people.
Also, I did mention I was interested in law school.
Any advice would be appreciated. Thanks.
« on: October 24, 2004, 10:51:35 PM »
Hello. I am a Senior at Boston University and am planning to graduate this year with a degree in Economics. I am considering going to law school and am also thinking about just going straight into the working world. I did some research and found out that I can go straight to work and receive my MA and PhD in Economics from this pretty much unknown school (link given below) during the evenings and it will only take me about 28 months in total (and will only cost me about 5 k in tuition).
My question is, is it worth it to get my MA and PhD from this school considering it is basically an unknown, or is the fact that I will get a PhD in Economics impressive as is despite the fact that possible employers probably never heard of the school? I am just wondering if by getting my MA and PhD from this small school, I will have more job opportunities and probably higher salaries than just my BA from Boston University?
Is it worth it or is it just a waste of time to get my PhD from this school:http://www.lacrosseuniversity.com/doc1/econ.html
Thanks for your advice.