whos to say those biblical figures

werent fucking crazy people seeing weird shit

theres 2 types of people in this world

preoles and herders

like sometimes i wonder if all those bugmen who line up... to see superhero movies and obsess on leftism

Actually have free will

or are controlled by the same collectivist eitity

they all group think look the same talk the same like the same shit

They're raw data, right, but how that data is acquired is where that judgment comes from. There might be factors which skew the data in the first place, like if the statistics come from a study cataloging the efficacy of an experiment and there is an inaccuracy or error at some point that wasn't noticed by the people running it.

That does not in any way imply subjectivity.

Statistics-gathering techniques are not perfect. But again, not 'subjective'.

>There being an aspect of judgment of reliability does not imply subjectivity.

And statisticians refine and analyze statistics. It's not their job to collect faulty statistics you know.

And throwing it all out based on it being imperfect? Ridiculous.

And further basing that to say psychology is pseudoscience? Smallbrain! 😦

El Chepo reminds me of a guy I met named Homer in another NS group I was in hahahahahaha

I even notice... "similarities" and "patterns" more than most people.

even among the "alt right and new right"

Theres "archtypes"

Some people will have similar voices looks, mannerisms ect.

You're not nearly as profound as you think you are.

Personality types...

Nah man I just... notice fucking patterns.

Humans tend to do that. It's widely acknowledged.

Funny how we came full circle right back to psychology.

Maybe they stem from your inner self, these archetypes being ingrained in your subconscious since development. But hey, that's just pseudoscience 😉

Some people are archtypes.

>using Jung to categorize all psychology

Like I did see a guy... with MY SAME ONE when I was in a hospital.

im laffin

He even had the same eyes, way of talking mannerism

He was like in his 50s shaven bald with a goatee.

>implying that i said anything about all psychology

It was weird.

Jung is harshly criticized for being unverifiable.

Cause HE seemed to notice.

And, would you look at that, pseudoscientific.

No shit, irma.

But Jung is definitely not representative of psychology.

Archtypes are pretty common throughout history and old stories and shit.

Did I say he was at any point?