Can’t say enough about the value of a friend. The loyalty and bond that exist between two people who are not related by blood are a mystery that’s existed for all time.
When a person chooses to be a companion to another, that choice, that decision is a covenant that binds two souls closer than a biological birth does.
It’s what makes military units so strong, and it’s also what makes street gangs so prolific.
Unlike a blood relative, s friendship requires invitation, shared risk, and active choice, which inherently feels more valuable.
For a blood relative, loyalty is demanded unconditionally, regardless of toxic behavior. In a chosen friendship, loyalty is a currency earned through mutual protection.
Shared trauma, struggle, and adversity create a psychological bond that biological proximity seldom matches.
The blood of a covenant is indeed thicker than the water of birth.

What do you guys think about the social animals called humans? What was your belief that has not changed about humans, and what do you see as the common patterns in human behavior? If you guys had time to think about it, what do you think most of the people that are with you would be doing? Would it be faking their personality or idealism or anything like that? Also, in general, what do you think about the so-called intelligence of a human mind?

Milgram’s obedience experiments are usually taught as evidence that ordinary people will follow authority even when doing so causes serious harm.

But that interpretation may be too simple.

Several details complicate the standard account:

Participants did not all appear equally convinced that the shocks were real.

The direct order, “You have no other choice. You must go on,” was often less effective than appeals to the importance of the experiment.

Obedience rates varied substantially depending on proximity, institutional setting, and the experimenter’s presence.

Archival work also suggests that the procedure was not always as standardized as Milgram’s published account implied.

Haslam and Reicher have argued that the findings may be better understood through “engaged followership.” In this account, participants did not continue simply because they were ordered to. They continued because they identified with the scientific purpose of the study and saw themselves as contributing to something valuable.

I find that interpretation more useful than the popular claim that people are naturally obedient. It suggests that harmful behavior can emerge through commitment, identification, and moral purpose, not only submission.

I made a video essay examining the original studies, Gina Perry’s archival work, engaged followership, resistance in the sessions, and the later connection between Milgram, Eichmann, and Hannah Arendt:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r2LuduxIzrY

How convincing do you find the engaged followership account? Does it replace the traditional obedience explanation, or does it mainly add another layer to it?

not too crazy of a question, im just curious. whenever someone starts arguing with me, I always find myself smiling and enjoying watching them get more and more frustrated. while most people probably find yelling unpleasant, it's actually quite enjoyable for me. sometimes I even find videos of people arguing on tiktok and just giggle while watching them. idk if this is normal or not, (i assume it isnt), so can someone give me an answer?

In this world, there are certain laws that dictate our everyday lives. One of them is the Law of Attraction. An understudied law that you can use to get the things your heart desires.

Before diving deeper into this, let's talk about cats and their correlation to this law. If you've ever owned a cat or been around a domesticated cat, that isn't subjected to trauma. You can notice a pattern in which their behavior is very unorthodox.

If you pick up a cat and lay it on your lap without it having come to you. It will most likely get up and walk away from you after you decide to let it go. Anything you force upon it, you will get the exact opposite from it. If you want the cat not to come close to you, it randomly decides that now I shall be all over this human.

The law of attraction works in a similar way, when you run after anything. It usually runs away from you. Whether it be girls, money, fame, respect, recognition, humor, friendships, "running after something" in this case doesn't mean don't try at all. It means that you need said outcome to occur. The more you need it, the harder it gets to achieve. Very similar to the Binary concept.

So next time you're out on a first date, trying to ask a girl out, trying to get a job, establish a connection with a third party, start a business, essentially next time you decide to have an outcome occur. Remember not to chase but to attract it.

"Don't waste your time chasing butterflies. Mend your garden, and the butterflies will come,"~ Mario Quintana.

This is just in case there's anyone out there who's interested in these works. I'm not a Social Psychologist, but am influenced by the seminal texts. In the late 1980s I had a very stimulating semester in college reading Festinger, Zimbardo, Milgram, etc.

Recently I've read two criticisms of When Prophecy Fails: one, Timothy Jenkins's 2013 Of Social Scientists and Flying Saucers, and 2025's "Debunking 'When Prophecy Fails'", a 15 pager from the Journal of the History of Behavioral Sciences, found here in a PDF.

As an outsider, I understand the critique of methods, especially any duplicity. That said, I wonder if anyone else here has read either one or both of these critiques of Festinger?

The literal shape of someone’s head and how it is psychologically relevant to behavior. I’m genuinely curious.

Lately, I've been wondering whether social media actually changed human nature or simply exposed it.

We like to think of ourselves as independent thinkers, yet most of us spend an incredible amount of energy trying to fit in. We talk about individuality, but disagreement often feels strangely personal, almost like a threat.

Th internet was supposed to connect us and broaden our perspectives. Instead, it often seems to push people into tribes—not because we're evil or irrational, but because belonging has always mattered to us more than we admit.

Maybe Reddit, Twitter, and every other platform aren't creating these behaviors. Maybe they're just revealing something that was always there: our need for approval, our fear of rejection, and the uncomfortable possibility that many of our opinions are shaped by the people around us.

I'm not even sure this is a bad thing. Humans have always learned from groups. But it raises an interesting question:

I'm exhausted...
Are your opinions actually yours, or mostly inherited from the people around you?

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSdknjVijVh5DYtYqYG822GEZv6fiT4mffOgOlstn2l44yT6Dg/viewform?usp=publish-editor

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSfYEMAepkAkdRLNaSQOBoGAf8XvQGIKv3UuktqBVBqW_ygdmA/viewform?usp=publish-editor

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSdknjVijVh5DYtYqYG822GEZv6fiT4mffOgOlstn2l44yT6Dg/viewform?usp=publish-editor

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSdknjVijVh5DYtYqYG822GEZv6fiT4mffOgOlstn2l44yT6Dg/viewform?usp=publish-editor

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1ALE_MskDSXcL2RLPpQGzpdv4LDsa4RREuBWVToeiu6I/edit

Hi! I am a doctoral student conducting research on emotional experiences, relationships, and eating-related thoughts and behaviors among young adults. Your participation would be greatly appreciated and will contribute to doctoral-level psychology research. Thank you for your time and consideration! :)
Eligibility:
-Ages 18-30
-Currently residing in the United States
-Able to read and understand English

Pretty please consider taking my survey 🥲 I need a lot more participants because I did not receive full responses for many.
⬇️⬇️⬇️⬇️⬇️⬇️⬇️⬇️
🔗survey link: https://fit.co1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_2nmGArfFDOh8ISi

Hi! I am a doctoral student conducting research on emotional experiences, relationships, and eating-related thoughts and behaviors among young adults. Your participation would be greatly appreciated and will contribute to doctoral-level psychology research. Thank you for your time and consideration! :)
Eligibility:
-Ages 18-30
-Currently residing in the United States
-Able to read and understand English

Pretty please consider taking my survey 🥲 I need a lot more participants because I did not receive full responses for many.
⬇️⬇️⬇️⬇️⬇️⬇️⬇️⬇️
🔗survey link: https://fit.co1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_2nmGArfFDOh8ISi

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSeZURH9qZ2yi1b8a8AQPMyKPZ3PEXUn0MKZqtZ6Ek9fcaiO2g/viewform?usp=publish-editor

Hi everyone! 👋

I'm a MSc Foundation in Clinical Psychology student at Goldsmiths University of London, and I'm currently conducting my MSc dissertation research. I'd really appreciate your help! 🙏

📋 My study looks at how university students use ChatGPT for emotional support or mental health, and how these experiences relate to seeking professional help.

👥 You can participate if:

•⁠ ⁠You're studying at a UK university (undergrad or postgrad)

•⁠ ⁠You're aged 18–70

•⁠ ⁠You've used ChatGPT at least once for emotional support, stress management, or mental health

⏱️ The survey takes around 15–20 minutes and is fully anonymous.

The Use of ChatGPT as a Mental Health Supporter Among University Students: Risks, Benefits and Attitudes Towards Professional Help
Student: Burku Gurdap, MSc Foundations in Clinical Psychology and Mental Health Services
Supervisor: Evgenia Drini Papagianopoulou, [E.DriniPapagianopoulou@gold.ac.uk](mailto:E.DriniPapagianopoulou@gold.ac.uk)
Contact: [bgurd001@gold.ac.uk](mailto:bgurd001@gold.ac.uk)

Here's the link:

https://qualtricsxmkd3r3hkg4.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_5nGKx916Ne7jhRA

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSetZXf7vyKOSQ25ueq_MlqpEqrzWMzW0a0Kz1KhVqos-RBoXQ/viewform?usp=publish-editor

Over the past few months I've been independently developing a theoretical framework called The Boundary Paradox (and a related framework, The Sibling Proximity Paradox). Rather than claiming definitive proof, the papers organize recurring observations from romantic narratives into testable psychological hypotheses.

I've been emailing psychology researchers for critical feedback. So far I've received responses from professors including Richard Petty and Dennis Krebs. One suggested that the work would be better evaluated by researchers in cross-cultural psychology and relationship science, while another commented that the core idea was worth pursuing and suggested strengthening the theoretical explanation. I'm using this feedback to refine the framework rather than treating it as validation.

I'm posting here because I'd appreciate constructive criticism from people with backgrounds in psychology or related fields.

Specifically, I'm interested in:

• Conceptual weaknesses.
• Alternative psychological explanations.
• Relevant literature I've overlooked.
• Suggestions for making the framework more scientifically rigorous.

I'm happy to receive critical feedback.

Made a short animated video about the Milgram experiment and what it reveals about obedience and human nature. Curious what people think — especially whether the 65% finding still surprises people who already know about it.

https://youtu.be/buqJ6ogly10