It is hard to refute an argument when every evidence you present against it is interpreted as obvious proof of your own state of pathological denial. Psychology is full of this kind of thinking, and this kind of people. Stay away from them, they are dangerous.

In a world view predicated on the ubiquity of a specific type of cognitive or behavioral dysfunction, it is impossible to claim one is "normal" or "healthy", because that is exactly what is expected from those who suffer from that dysfunction. If everyone in the asylum claims to be sane, sanity is impossible to demonstrate to the staff. Psychiatry is the one branch of medicine where it is impossible to prove you are not sick. In fact, the harder you try, the more convinced they are that you need help. And once they get a hold of you, you certainly do.

Clinical psychology is a pseudoscience, not far removed from astrology or creationism. It has as many adherents as it has because it's so easy to get a psychology degree in our universities, and those who are incapable of getting certified in business, science or the arts usually wind up there. The result is a cadre of supposedly educated people who have accepted the preposterous assertions of this modern day superstition and invested it with a built-in constituency of believers.

The world is full of religions and other superstitions, but this one is particularly dangerous because its practitioners are permitted to prescribe drugs, imprison the sick, give expert testimony in court, help write legislation, exert an influence on literature and popular culture, and in other ways operate so that it is impossible to challenge their ideas unless you are already credentialed in their priesthood. Those of you who feel my concerns are exaggerated, just ask yourself the following question: in what other branch of science is there so much controversy and disagreement and contradictory opinions amongst its practitioners?

Any questions?