Los autoproclamados "Anarcocapitalistas" (Ancaps) o como les llamo "Los AntiEstado S.A" se llaman a sí mismos "anarquistas" sólo porque se oponen al Estado (a diferencia de los ahora llamados "libertarios / Libertarados que proponen le reducción de esta institución para mantener sólo la que les conviene) Lo cierto es que ser defensor de la propiedad privada y el capitalismo, y llamarse "anarquista" es no saber NADA sobre anarquismo, pues no sólo es oponerse al Estado sino también contra el capitalismo, la explotación y la propiedad privada de los medios de producción. O sea, no basta con odiar al gobierno pa’ ser anarquista, también hay que estar en contra del lucro, del interés y de que unxs pocxs se forren a costa del trabajo de otrxs.

El problema es que hasta lxs marxistas (y varixs académicxs) caen en el mismo error: reducen el anarquismo a puro anti-Estado, como si fuera solo eso. Y claro, eso les sirve pa’ dejar fuera al anarquismo del tablero, como si el marxismo fuera la única opción seria contra el capitalismo. (y les ha funcionado)

Pero basta mirar un poquito la historia pa’ ver que el anarquismo siempre ha sido una lucha contra toda forma de dominación, no solo el Estado. Por eso decir que los "ancaps" son anarquistas es un chiste: son primero capitalistas, y si algo del anarquismo les incomoda porque choca con el libre mercado, prefieren desechar ese aspecto del anarquismo con tremenda torcedura a la historia antes que cuestionar el capitalismo.

DATE: April 07, 2025 at 05:29PM
SOURCE: SCIENCE DAILY PSYCHOLOGY FEED

TITLE: Childhood experiences shape the brain's white matter with cognitive effects seen years later

URL: sciencedaily.com/releases/2025…

Investigators have linked difficult early life experiences with reduced quality and quantity of the white matter communication highways throughout the adolescent brain. This reduced connectivity is also associated with lower performance on cognitive tasks.

URL: sciencedaily.com/releases/2025…

-------------------------------------------------

Private, vetted email list for mental health professionals: clinicians-exchange.org

Unofficial Psychology Today Xitter to toot feed at Psych Today Unofficial Bot @PTUnofficialBot

NYU Information for Practice puts out 400-500 good quality health-related research posts per week but its too much for many people, so that bot is limited to just subscribers. You can read it or subscribe at @PsychResearchBot

Since 1991 The National Psychologist has focused on keeping practicing psychologists current with news, information and items of interest. Check them out for more free articles, resources, and subscription information: nationalpsychologist.com

EMAIL DAILY DIGEST OF RSS FEEDS -- SUBSCRIBE: subscribe-article-digests.clin…

READ ONLINE: read-the-rss-mega-archive.clin…

It's primitive... but it works... mostly...

-------------------------------------------------

#psychology #counseling #socialwork #psychotherapy @psychotherapist @psychotherapists @psychology @socialpsych @socialwork @psychiatry #mentalhealth #psychiatry #healthcare #depression #psychotherapist

Anatomy of a Nature AI article

Edgy first paragraph in bold text saying something gently provocative but essentially brainless.

The first few paragraphs are an introduction to the topic at hand, which is generally about replacing scientists and allied workers, either partly or wholly, with AI at some point in the near future. Chin rubbing exposition on how it seems like everyone is using AI these days. Nod to the fact that this is a terrible idea, but that also it might not be entirely a bad idea.

Several paragraphs with extensive quotes from scientists who, not coincidentally, run companies that seek to replace scientists and allied workers either partly or wholly, with AI at some point in the near future. The tone is completely positive. If it seems negative, that’s only because the problem is solved by their shiny newthing.

Some statements about or from publishers who see human scientists as an annoying inefficiency in the process of turning government money into profits and can’t wait to replace them entirely with AIs, not to mention their own staff. [Note saying that Nature comment (or whatever) is editorially independent].

A few more paragraphs with extensive quotes from scientists who, not coincidentally, run companies that seek to replace scientists and allied workers either partly or wholly, with AI at some point in the near future. The tone is completely positive. If it seems negative, that’s only because the problem is solved by their shiny newthing.

Closing paragraph from an actual scientist just trying to do science saying, “Seriously!? This is the stupidest idea I’ve heard since last week when Nature wrote the exact same article and asked me to comment.” This statement is followed by a succinct and obvious explanation of exactly why, but you can’t read any of this paragraph in the online version unless you have paid your Nature subs. The whole article just fades to nothingness way before this paragraph.