andioop@programming.dev to Programmer Humor@programming.devEnglish · 1 month agowell that's rudeprogramming.devimagemessage-square36fedilinkarrow-up11.24Karrow-down13
arrow-up11.24Karrow-down1imagewell that's rudeprogramming.devandioop@programming.dev to Programmer Humor@programming.devEnglish · 1 month agomessage-square36fedilink
minus-squaretechnocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.comlinkfedilinkarrow-up59arrow-down4·edit-21 month agoAt least it seems more “scientific” than anything that Jung ever did. https://psychology.stackexchange.com/questions/13027/is-there-a-reasonable-scientific-backing-for-carl-jungs-type-theories
minus-squaresaimen@feddit.orglinkfedilinkarrow-up2arrow-down1·1 month agoYour source does not support your claim at all. Seems like you are projecting your scientific illiteracy onto Jung.
At least it seems more “scientific” than anything that Jung ever did.
https://psychology.stackexchange.com/questions/13027/is-there-a-reasonable-scientific-backing-for-carl-jungs-type-theories
Your source does not support your claim at all. Seems like you are projecting your scientific illiteracy onto Jung.