Charlatans do not exist; only psychologists.

This, my friends, is what I call an inauspicious opener:

I’ve been a psychology professor since 2012

Nothing ill-suits me away from leniency or fairness more than those self-conscious words which Devon Price wrote in a Medium piece in March which he boldly titled, “Laziness Does Not Exist (But unseen barriers do).”

What ensues is the most tiresome, stereotypically Psychological hocus pocus stream of unaccountability ever.

The psychological field and profession are utter bullshit.

The “field” is brimming with frauds masquerading as scientists who are trained to distort common sense with ostentatious reams of self-important “scholarese” whose ultimate goal is to coat all human failings in the wondrous victimized luxuriousness of mental illness and unhealthy coping mechanisms.

In this case, Price’s blanket statement, and title of his piece, is quite an ambitious attempt at secularizing and “clinicizing” a moral human failure. So much like a psychologist, I have to say.

I’ve watched PhD candidates take months or years revising a single dissertation draft; I once had a student who enrolled in the same class of mine two semesters in a row, and never turned in anything either time.
I don’t think laziness was ever at fault.
In fact, I don’t believe that laziness exists.

If Price had humbly restrained his lazy apologetics, I might have been inclined to let this slide. But his steadfast insistence that laziness cannot exist because “muh mental illness” is an irresistible foray into the lunacy of today’s psychological field with its attendant disavowal of human moral failure as an elemental cause of anything.

Some people are simply lazy.

They prefer to do nothing at the expense of having nothing.

Their cost/benefit algorithm tells them all they want, or need, to know: it’s funner to sit on your ass with a bag of chips in your lap and the television’s remote control next to you than leaving the house for the sake of being useful to the world, your family, and yourself.


But Price is not to be deterred.

 judging a homeless person for wanting to buy alcohol or cigarettes is utter folly. When you’re homeless, the nights are cold, the world is unfriendly, and everything is painfully uncomfortable. Whether you’re sleeping under a bridge, in a tent, or at a shelter, it’s hard to rest easy. You are likely to have injuries or chronic conditions that bother you persistently, and little access to medical care to deal with it. You probably don’t have much healthy food.
In that chronically uncomfortable, over-stimulating context, needing a drink or some cigarettes makes fucking sense. As Kim explained to me, if you’re laying out in the freezing cold, drinking some alcohol may be the only way to warm up and get to sleep. If you’re under-nourished, a few smokes may be the only thing that kills the hunger pangs. And if you’re dealing with all this while also fighting an addiction, then yes, sometimes you just need to score whatever will make the withdrawal symptoms go away, so you can survive.

Price paints an overly wide and excessively forgiving swath of homelessness with his pet cop outs.

This is what psychologists are trained to do. It is their professional narrative. Humans are intrinsically virtuous creatures and immorality is not at the crux of our failings; only mental disease and bad behavior patterns drive us to perdition.

Beware, however, for psychology’s profit is in bolstering and perpetuating its share of the market, ie, profit. If the market is mental illness and personality dysfunction, don’t expect psychologists to resist blaming that which only they can “fix” courtesy of their clinically learned minds.

In other words, the only reason for a highly paid professional to exist is to lend his “expertise” (for a price) in order to help others utilize his unique ability to thwart that which begs his skilled scrutiny.

A charlatan.