andioop@programming.dev to Programmer Humor@programming.devEnglish · 14 days agowell that's rudeprogramming.devimagemessage-square38fedilinkarrow-up11.24K
arrow-up11.24Kimagewell that's rudeprogramming.devandioop@programming.dev to Programmer Humor@programming.devEnglish · 14 days agomessage-square38fedilink
minus-squaretechnocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.comlinkfedilinkarrow-up59·edit-214 days 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-up2·13 days 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.