Q: Have you been able to guage the effect of your book and web site?

JWE: That's a qualified 'yes.' I am consulting a research policy company for their recommendations on the design of an impact study. But in the absence of that, there is reporting data trickling in the form of log activity that has given the team some interesting leads to follow up on. With one notable exception, which I will get to in a moment, my effect to date consists of a fairly remarkable scattering of local influences. A Florida International University professor assigned my Borderline Disorder report to a class of senior developmental students. And I am following up on data that suggests similar assignments are taking place at other universities. So as to how much of an influence, it depends where you are. There are whole programs out there that have been affected by me. That have had to make some adjustments because of my web site or that have had to issue some kind of response to their students.

Q: How do you know?

JWE: How do I know to look into that? The web logs will record something on the order of 20-30 accesses of a specific report by similar-but-distinguishable IP addresses. You plug those IPs into the whois field of a traceroute program, and the same university keeps popping up. Right now I'd have to say we're looking into somewhere between 15 and 20 such patterns, and it's only been a couple months since I've given my logs this granular attention. And then this speculation is often backed up by an e-mail, as one of the students decides to write me to tell me that I am causing quite a 'raucus' in the department. I received an e-mail in '02 from one student -- I don't recall now whether it was Penn State or the University of Miami -- but apparently there was a psych professor there who was quite unpopular with her students. One of the students seized on my web site and aggressively disseminated it and -- before you know it -- I was a household name. So in the very least, I think we can establish that within many circles the web site is something people are talking about. The evidence for word of mouth is considerable. Too many instances in which people enter my web site through the same page, and the page in question is a report to which I had not posted a link in some Internet forum in quite some time. And the accesses would be concentrated over what you'd call a fairly brief period, like 1-2 days. Clearly the case of someone e-mailing the link to one of my reports. In fact I recently noticed such exchanges between the Presidential offices of various University of California campuses.

Q: But you're not famous. [laughter]

JWE: [smiling] Nor fabulously wealthy. But that doesn't mean I don't do well for myself. The spotlight is no place for the shadow of modern psychology. And I wouldn't have it any other way. It's all about staying beneath the radar. You'd think book sales were slowing based on the rather moody Amazon sales ranking. One day I'm not in the top million, another I'm in the top 50,000. But the vast majority of sales are done through PublisherDirect, and I set aside enough captions on my web site to ensure visitors are aware the book is half the price on PublisherDirect. And if civic duty and compassion for the consumer isn't enough of an incentive, I do not earn royalties for books sold on Amazon.

Too much is made of making a bestseller list and appearing on nationally syndicated television or radio programs. All these authors falling over one another to do a reading for C-SPAN. Money and ranking. But writing a book like Fireflies in the Shadow of the Sun -- being the bearer of its vision -- is a privilege. You don't write a book like this for numbers. That's not what being the author of this book is about. I didn't break all the publishing rules to be topical and relevant for a day. I offer a view of a modern institution from the perspective of something timeless. I wrote a critical ethnography, and I did it as a work of non-fiction which is to say that while it is based on actual events, it is at its heart a story. I chose to write it up as a narrative based on actual events because what I am doing is all about the humanity and inhumanity of my experiences with the psychological community, and I wanted my readers to feel that as if firsthand. And then I violated another rule by publishing under an assumed name. The media does not deal directly with individuals who do not make themselves completely known and available.

Q: That wasn't a deal breaker for your publisher ... the pen name? How did you work that out?

JWE: They weren't happy. They told me it would spell death as far as media attention was concerned. But I was able to persuade my publisher that the cost of managing risks to my security at the front end were not as great as managing those associated with public knowledge of my given name. If people knew my name, they could connect me with specific institutions, and then seek to minimize my argument by claiming the experiences on which it is based are unique to a handful of rogue programs. My publisher also understood that my pn name offers as much protection to these programs, and this protection reduces the threat of lawsuits.

Q: But you're also saying your book was a labor of love.

Yes, but also that I could actually be more influential if I stayed beneath the radar. The spotlight is no place for the shadow of modern psychology. And I wouldn't have it any other way. If you've read anything I've written about dreams or Jung, you'd understand my fascination with experiences like dreams whose capacity to influence us is strong because they engage us while we are sleeping and when their meaning or designs are disguised by their symbolism, irrationality, or by our failure to remember them. I have always likened the role of 'Wyatt Ehrenfels' in the psychological community to the role of dreams in the personality. Having said that, this does not mean I am entirely cut off from the media. Someone the other day informed me that he thought he heard my work mentioned on a National Public Radio spot. I thought it could be true given someone within WHRO accessed my web site. WHRO hosts an NPR program. So who knows? In fact, it is quite common for me to find media in my web logs. So I suspect my reports are being used as source material or inspiration for features or discussion points. None of this comes as a surprise. The state of affairs is a natural compromise between an interest in my ideas and a reluctance among media to work directly with sources that will not identify themselves (i.e. "Wyatt Ehrenfels" is a pen name).

Q: So you prefer to fly under the radar.

JWE: I can be more influential under the radar. I feel that if the influence is more covert and stretched out over a longer period that the changes can be more tectonic. But if psychology professors knew who and what they were dealing with, there are steps they could take to blunt my effect. This is not to say that some professors are not more cirumspect in the way they deal with their students as a result of being aware that I am out there or that their students are aware I am out there. No one wants to end up a feature story on my news page like the one airing the grievances of a doctoral student at a professional school in Missouri. That report was viewed hundreds of times within a one week period last summer. In short, they know I'm out there. And they don't want to read about themselves in a widely circulated fireflySun.com report, nor do they want to encounter a student who may be tougher intellectually or emotionally from having reviewed the site. And then you have my Careers Page. Peaking at the #22 spot in a Google search on [psychology careers], a page I had been circulating in every psychology student forum I could find. In fact, my news page reached the very top of the Google charts, so to speak. Tens of thousands of accesses. Two weeks later the American Psychological Association issues a statement claiming to have received a critical mass of questions from students discouraged about a lack of career opportunities for recipients of research PhDs. I was not the only person who thought the APA's new careers page was a reaction to an epidemic of healthy skepticism stoked by my report. Two individuals had written me in the past attributing two other APA developments to my work: the APA's acquisition of the ASDs signature dreaming periodical and the APA's page on resources for parents of children with disabilities. 60 Minutes aired a story about fraudulent recruiting and marketing practices by postsecondary institutions, and I listened to that story, I thought, "wow. this really speaks to me. This really satisfies my thirst for change." Then when I reached that point in the story where I learned the government, and specifically, the SEC had been leading an investigation of these institutions, I remembered all the accesses of relevant fireflySun.com reports by sources inside the SEC just weeks earlier. So I believe we are beginning to make a difference ... all sorts of differences. And as a corollary to that, I believe that the less people know about the size of my audience and the extent of my direct influence, the more that influence goes uncontested. It's not unlike the kind of influence on waking awareness -- waking attitudes -- that I attribute to dreaming -- to experiences during sleep which we more often than not do not even remember. Similarly, Wyatt Ehrenfels may not appear in the list of any credits, but as a denizen of Society's Unconscious where Psychology is concerned, he will bring his pressure to bear."

Q: I remember reading on your web site that you used to introduce yourself to metro rail commuters and college students -- "

JWE: Yeah, which more often than not, sparked extended discussions about dreaming and Psychology, particularly what I think dreams do and what I think is wrong with the psychological community. People want short and straight answers. There appears to be an appetite for what I am doing within the public, yes. But for all the reasons I have discussed plus some more I have yet to discuss you cannot measure the significance of this campaign by my book's Amazon sales rank. For obvious reasons. In fact I think it's faring quite well there considering the price of the book is twice what it is on my publisher's web site and my web site is littered with disclaimers recommending Publisher Direct. And of course a lot of visitors write that I intend to purchase the book when they're through with my web site -- well -- there are hundreds of pages on my web site. As interesting as my web site is, if you aren't blind or fatigued after all that muckraking, you're not human. But all indications are that my book and my web site are beginning to make inroads with the student community. Take for example these remarks to a teaching psychology forum from one professor: [reads from notecard]

I know we had the "difficult students" discussion not very long ago (very helpful BTW). I have a specific one. On the first day of my Intro class, she announced that she hates psychology, thinks psychologists are manipulative, feels statistics are just a bunch of manipulations as well, and doesn't trust research (I didn't even ask a question, she just blurted it out). I asked her why she is taking the class, and she gave some vague response about wanting to be able to use it. Now, I know my job is to teach them, and I can't ever really know if they believe it. However, I can tell she is going to be a problem student, one who will take up class time and dispute much of what I say (she did it the first day). I previously had a student who didn't believe in psychology for similar reasons, but he was in general a very quiet student and not disruptive. I'm not confident this student will respond similarly. Any suggestions for dealing with this specific problem student?

This kind of concern is cropping up all over psych forums and in some cases in the wake of my efforts to address this or that student community. And the e-mails I receive from students, without giving me too much credit, indicate that I have been able to capitalize on a natural skepticism among students -- that as undergraduates, given a single educated voice of opposition like myself, [you] can turn from blind acceptance to skepticism for the precipitously formal aspects of their socialization into a professional community. Remember, you don't have to be brilliant by any stretch of the imagination to do what I'm doing now. You just have to be in an opportune position to make the kind of observations I made and not have a stake in neglecting the facts. These seem like simple enough circumstances, but psych professors make such positions along the career track conditional or contingent on depriving these facts their very facticity.

Q: Where should I go for your insights into dreaming? The book? Or the the web site?

JWE: The book and web site are companions. I'm sure there's a way to present the same information in a non-fiction essay. As a medium, the novel has certain advantages over the web site in that the dreams, the musings by the characters about their dreams, and the waking experiences and personalities that serve as the architects of the dream, hang together in a way that compels the reader, both logically and emotionally, to consider the dream as if he or she were the dreamer. Given the free verse that is experience, I have more freedom -- than that allowed under the conventions and categories of essay writing -- to appeal to the full spectrum of a reader's sensibilities -- touching a reader at a visceral, intuitive, and intellectual level -- to present both the facts and the broader meaning and significance of the facts -- by integrating fact, fiction, theory, and symbol. Essays like the kind featured on my web site -- and don't get me wrong, I enjoyed the challenge of writing in this format -- can only reach a person on an intellectual level. There is something to be said for writing in such a way as to lead your readers to draw your conclusions for themselves, and a novel allows that. When the reader participates in the story, the ideas are that much more compelling, and they educate through transformation, sometimes bypassing the intellectual level altogether to alter the reader's understanding by way of altering the reader. This is the language of experience. Dreams, as experiences, do this. So why shouldn't I do this by creating an experience for my reader. So not only does the book present material you won't find on the web site -- stuff about dreaming about the real-life odyssey of Wyatt Ehrenfels and friends -- but as for what the book and web site have in common, well, the book presents as a living, breathing storyline what the web site segregates into distinct reports. The web reports are more focused and specialized for the purpose of presenting an argument on its technical merits, but if you really want to stir a person at the level of the soul and give that person a glimpse of the whole living breathing thing, you need to tell the story and seek to draw the reader into the story.

Q: What do you hope to accomplish with your book and web site?

JWE: I doubt Psychology will alter its way of doing business. If it doesn't make allowances for science or for the nature of what it purports to study I don't see why it would make any adjustments on my account. My principal purpose is to provide debriefing and support for those who have been disillusioned or disappointed by psychology professors with respect to their education and their careers. But there is some evidence to suggest that psych profs may be disposed to making certain adjustments to avoid appearing to fit my description of them. They are very aware already of the problems I describe. They have to live with them because they do not think they are capable of having an impact as individuals and because they know that to advocate reform is to assume risks to their own standing. Their colleagues have given them plenty of reason to believe that their would be hell to pay for suggesting the field is off-track. But many psych profs accept the fact there is more than a kernel of truth to what I am saying and they are willing to live with that as long as we keep these shortfalls out of the public psyche. Out of the student psyche. Many of these profs will make some fine adjustments because they know I have sensitized their students to some of their dysfunctional behavior and dynamics. So -- am I having an effect? You bet! I think at this point the burden falls on them to make some argument to the contrary.

Q: Why did you decide not to pursue a university position?

JWE: Good dream research cannot take place in departments of psychology. All institutions are governed by policies and standard operating procedures (SOPs), and it is useful to approach Psychology from that angle. Those SOPs that govern life in departments of Psychology are prohibitive and, beyond that, disproportionately prohibitive of people who want to study complex phenomena about which little is known. Look, in most cases, a company uses sales figures as a way of guaging whether they should change the way they fundamentally operate -- do business. The academic university does not really have a consumer. Granted, they often treat their students like consumers, but in the scheme of things, we can't compare the credit accounting system to the consumer product market. Students get their credits and when they amass so many credits they become eligible for employment. Though employers might require a certain major, they hardly have intimate details about curriculum composition, and among educational factors that help a graduate find work, major and gross GPA have some limited bearing as demographics, but that's it. Students don't know what to demand from an educational institution, and more often than not, they are perfectly content to assume that what their professors are providing them is either beneficial or makes-no-difference the world over. That's the educational piece of it -- and the career preparation piece -- but as for the production of knowledge itself -- there is not much in the way of consumption that is driving Psychology research. Psych profs act as both producers and consumers of knowledge and give themselves what they want to see. Research serves primarily as a way of farming and scouting prospective colleagues, which may explain why research production drops off considerably among profs who are already tenured, and why 95 percent of publications are produced by about 5 percent of the faculty. And regarding my case, I'd have to say there are some biases built into the system of Psychology that adversely affect, or discriminate against, people with interests like myself and with the personal and professional qualities those interests demand from a researcher. By extension, the phenomena in which we are interested is also an object of discrimination.

Q: What would you do differently?

JWE: I have always been interested in understanding the function and language of dreaming and in the relationship between dreaming and waking experiences. Dreaming demands grassroots detectivework. I have been calling on Psychology to relax its policies and procedures (masquerading as genuine scientific standards) or to develop a separate-and-equal set of SOPs for exploratory research. If you like, call it affirmative action for students of dreams and other keynote psychological phenomena. We need a more integrated or flexible system like that which can be found in other sciences. NASA officials ascribe equal significance for its technical mission to Mars, which is similar to Earth and about which we know much, and its reconnaissance of Saturn.

Q: How does Psychology discriminate against people interested in studying phenomena that are most "psychological"?

JWE: I would be required to make far more adjustments and sacrifices as a dream researcher than professors who study other phenomena. And my sacrifices are more costly to the understanding of a phenomenon like dreams than to the understanding of more technical, materialistic, or utilitarian phenomena. But Psychology insists on reserving its rewards (publication, grant money, faculty appointment, tenure) for sharpshooting profs whose interests allow for end-stage scientific research. The kind of research that imitates cosmetic features of science by utilizing inferential or sophisticated (i.e. multivariate) statistics, controlled experimental conditions, or proprietary access to brain matter in laboratory settings. None of these is appropriate for phenomena about which we know so little as we do about dreams. We have in effect created a system of reinforcement or, to use another metaphor an ecosystem controlled by Darwinian principles of natural selection. In this system, the "fittest" (and psych profs love to use the term "fit") are those who neglect phenomena like dreaming or else distort it with an excessively, gratuitously, and precipitously formal lab science.

Q: Is your objection getting any attention inside the field, where this matter can be addressed?

JWE: No, and it's unlikely it ever will. The career survival of psych profs depend on compliance with these standard operating procedures, and they all behave as if they teach these SOPs as if they came out of a best-selling book titled the "The 7 habits of highly successful scientists." The SOPs behave like prejudices inherent in the "system." And to make matters worse, these prejduces become incarnated in new generations of individual psych profs. How so? The SOPs become standards for faculty appointment or criteria by which faculty search committees lavish preferential treatment on some candidates over others, in effect skewing hiring in favor of skeptics, serviceable standard bearers, and technical or administrative savants who harbour similar prejudices against dreams.

Q: Are you saying Psychology should not be a science?

JWE: Absolutely not. I am saying that despite appearances and masquerades, psychology is currently not a science. Within certain parameters, Science, or the scientific method as it is known widely across disciplines, is actually an open framework with few rules where research benefits from the researcher's discretionary use of his/her own wits and from the unique requirements of the phenomenon and question under study. But psych profs limit freedom and fidelity to the phenomenon by treating Science as if it were synonymous with a set of technical rules, which is why many refer to Psychology not as a science but as a paradigm. The celebration and enforcement of an ever-widening nucleus of arbitrary and superfluous rules (i.e. policies and procedures) alienates the psych prof from his or her own wits and from the phenomena under study. It limits freedom and flexibility and creates conditions for biases. This means our own social conventions restrict the range of facts and truths we can uncover through research.

Q: Why do psych profs look the other way when the problems are so clear?

JWE: The system, such as it is, favors the appointment of psych profs who lack an interest in dreams and so they feel no loyalty, no impulse, no natural imperative from within to address themselves to these matters. Me, I have been born to dream, born to study dreams, and born to promote and defend the study of dreams, even from psych profs themselves as ironically required by the current state of affairs. But more than that. Now I don't know all traits or attributes that are correlated with, that tend to go with, having the kind of vita faculty search committees look for in the applicants they ultimately hire. But I do know that among these are a lack of curiosity. When you talk about why psych profs do the work of psych profs, what gets them up in the morning and what not, you are talking about something very different than what motivates me and other 'marginals'. I say 'marginals' because it would not be entirely accurate to refer to ourselves as 'misfits' even though that's how we feel from time to time [pause for laughter]. But an insatiable appetite for knowledge and a childlike curiosity, the kind that motivates astronomers to gaze up at the stars even outside the observatory -- these things don't make psych profs tick. Their motivation tends to come from outside them rather than inside them -- which is to say they are motivated extrinsically -- the approval of peers -- the adulation of students -- social solidarity -- a sense of belonging to a profession and being a scientist -- being a distinguished member of a very normal society with very regular affairs -- the reputation of their field -- a sense that what they're doing is right at any cost -- that's also important to them -- and of course there are the 'subsidiary objectives' that help bring about the desired state of affairs. Here we have networking and affiliations, policy advocacy in the public interest, the development of a framework of shared expectations, peers being able to understand one another and piece together one another's findings with a minimum expenditure of energy. The kind of stuff we're talking about here can be summed up as the "preservation and promotion of an institution." But more often than not, real science, and by that I mean what is required for real science, gets caught in the cross hairs of what we do to advance institutional objectives. Now my aims are more personological, yes, but these happen to be more aligned with the fundamentals of science like conceptualization and fact collection. THEY -- are concerned with what they need to maintain professional development, which contrasts unnecessarily with what they and I need to mature as adults, individuate as persons, and progress as students of a phenomenon. THEY -- are concerned with maintaining group harmony and compliance with the SOPs and with projecting an image of solidarity and legitimacy as a rank-and-file science. These objectives maximize pressure to uniformity and over the decades, the field evolves into a homogeneous community worthy of all that some but not all insiders call my over-generalizations. Individuality of any kind, whether it comes from a researcher, student, or research participant, complicates their efforts, and they treat ideas that seem like they come from individuals with skepticism and dismiss them as arrogance or kookery. And they have a sensitive -- keen -- sense of smell for such unique or intraindividual products, probably because it contrasts so sharply with their slavishly compliant, derivative, and musty inbred thinking, if you could call it "thinking." All this makes for an environment inhospitable to persons driven by curiosity, and they treat curiosity and unconventional wisdom itself as if it deserved a DSM diagnostic code...and a cure. At first they address you as if you had a disease and they seek to modify your behavior under the guise of a concern for your career, but if and when that fails, the language begins to change, it becomes clear that they feel it is they who have the disease and that the disease is YOU. Call it a personality conflict if you will, but make no mistake that the infection itself is socially transmitted among psych profs with the power to define what is normal for their community and what is infection.

Q: Will you ever return to Psychology?

JWE: True psychology is a part of me. It goes where I go. And I will continue to go where I can best serve Psychology as its true student -- outside the university. I think the terms academic freedom is a misnomer. If you looked at this from the construct of governance, which most people don't think to do because they think of academics as governing themselves, you'd find that they govern themselves like communists. Their first priority is the community and their place within it. This hampers a free market of ideas. Do not let the diversity of topics and research interests within Psychology fool you. They approach their topics, their students, their research volunteers, and their research products, as anonymous bricks in the wall and they treat their peers as interchangeable labor. Even when they rhapsodize fetishistically about multiculturalism and diversity, what this amounts to, besides an asphyxiating race consciousness, is a racially and ethnically diverse group of like-minded and indentured peers. Given what we see has not worked, I think the only cure for Psychology's comorbid Borderline Personality Disorder and Executive Systems Dysfunction is some governance constrained only by a bill of rights for individual researchers. Corporations have their Boards, the Roman Catholic Church has its Vatican, and even the United States has its government. The kind of government by peer pressure, by committee and by covert social aggression, which appeals to and which refines the human instinct to imitate and conform, has failed Science to the extent it has failed a range of phenomena in and around the heart of Psychology.

Q: Are there no good programs out there for me?

JWE: It's not only a question of politics, but also of professional training. You know, astronomers tell us that given the vastness of space, it would be more likely than not that planets exist with conditions favorable to life. Much in the same vein I would not be surprised to learn of a psych department out there where temperance and tolerance and mental health is a majority trait. I have yet to see one and contrary to what many people believe about me, I'd actually be pleased to find one, here, on THIS planet. When you ask that question, I have to tell you that all politics aside, you are still being socialized into a community and its culture, so you may still feel the friction and pressure of uniformity and you may still be disappointed with in the person and professional you've become -- even if the faculty is benign. The faculties -- uh -- both the faculties that have become the rule and those hypothetical exceptions -- those faculties hypothetically hospitable to students who formulate or appreciate original ideas -- function within the same framework of policies and procedures that pressure them with career rewards and penalties. So I wouldn't comb the nation's beaches in search of that buried treasure of a program. You would think that I could recommend students -- much like you [points to audience] -- examine with a fine tooth comb the day-to-day affairs of a psych prof to get a solid grasp of what is expected of you and then, envisioning what you want to be doing, ask a number of psych profs whether you could that in their position. But the problem with that is that psych profs will put a pleasant face on anything presented to them in general terms. When I talked about 'dreams' I stand a decent chance of finding a prof who might say, 'oh sure you could do that.' But he may be envisioning something that doesn't offend him. Have him or her review a theory and methodology and then see where you stand. Also, I have enjoyed my relationships with many of my undergrad profs, some of which are even appreciative of originality and hard work, but when you get to the graduate level, you will find that their expectations of you, in both a technical and an ideological sense, change enormously. It's like they view you as one of their products or they behave like one of those parents who live vicariously through their children or who view their children as an extension, if not a clone, of themselves. They expect you to carry some banners, so to speak. You are being asked, well, not asked, to represent them as mentors, the department as a whole, the field of psychology, and then science itself. Imagine wanting to hold a yard sale but needing not only a local municipal permit but also needing to make sure you are in compliance with state and federal law as well. I wish I had a realistic example at my fingertips, but the unavailability of one of may itself show just how oppressive life is in departments of Psychology. As a graduate student you are required to bear quite a burden. I wish I could say this was all for the greater good, but the research suffers for it. The phenomenon under study -- suffers for it. And you as an individual, mature adult, and true scientist, suffer for it.

NOTE
Ehrenfels is currently working to boost supplies of book to Barnes & Noble and Amazon, where it is selling out. For now, Ehrenfels recommends PublisherDirect (click here) for speed.

fireflySun.com Report List

16 Points Memo: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Authors, Scholars Unite to Support Wyatt Ehrenfels: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Teams with Dream Researcher Gail Bixler: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Exposes Our Fear of Exposure Therapy: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Interviews with Internal Correspondent: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Says Psychology Professors Suffer from Professional Analogue of Borderline Personality Disorder: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Student Defies Psychology Professor's Warning Not to Correspond with Wyatt Ehrenfels: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Chides Daniel Dennett for Evangelical Atheism in Psychology: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Argues Psychology Graduate Education Not Worth the Money: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Psychology Professors Acknowledge Student Complaints about Curriculum: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Answers Critics, Campaign of Diversionary Tactics: Wyatt Ehrenfels

American Psychological Association Denies Listserv Members Access to Wyatt Ehrenfels OKTV Broadcast Report: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Talks about the Dissertation Experience: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Discusses a Methodology for Dream Research: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Defends Dreaming from Psychologist Negative Thinking: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Urban E-Zine Entelechy Publishes Wyatt Ehrenfels Essay: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Defends Dream Research against Vaunted Psychology News Group Moderator: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Customizes Probe to Explore Dreaming-Waking Interface: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Teams with Kindred Critic Dennis Fox: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Teams with Psychotherapist Elio Frattaroli: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Teams with Political Scientist John Freie: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Teams with Biologist John Hewitt: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Shows Support for Embattled Psychology Graduate Student: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Counsels Students on True Callings: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Amuses with Proposal of Psychology Graduate Program Insurance: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Says Corrective Statistical Procedure Emblematic of Psychology's Flaws: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Brad Jesness Target of Malicious Psychologists on Usenet: Brad Jesness

Wyatt Ehrenfels Teams with Medal-Winning Author M.J. John: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Critical of Vaunted Cornell Research Claiming Opposites Do NOT Attract: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Criticizes Berkeley Psychology Professors for Left Wing Bias: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Offers Links to Education and Appropriations Subcommittees: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Thunders Away at Psychology's Load-Bearing Premises: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Counsels High School Students on Choice of College Major: Wyatt Ehrenfels

APPIC Match Service Helps Veterans Hospital Psychologists Discriminate against Applicants w/ Disabilities: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Psychology Professional Development at Odds with Adult Maturation: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Republishes Work of College Curriculum Critic and FOX News Writer Wendy McElroy: Wendy McElroy

Wyatt Ehrenfels Likens Psychological Research to Premature Ejaculation: Wyatt Ehrenfels

According to Social Psychologist Wyatt Ehrenfels, Diversity Is Skin Deep, Black-and-White at University of Michigan: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Dismantles Psychology's Standard Defenses against Criticism: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Points to Hypocrisy in Terror Management Research: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Releases Revitalized Pocket Memo: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Publishes Critique in Revolution Issue of New Therapist Magazine: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Is Psychology at Odds with Itself?: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Says Campaign Not Intend to Offend Psychology Majors: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Why Community Access Television Is Coming Around to Wyatt Ehrenfels: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Overview of Wyatt Ehrenfels's Fireflies in the Shadow of the Sun: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Are Psychology Professors Prejudiced against Psyche: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Psychology's Science of Dreams Fails Science and Dreams: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Psychology Graduate Schools Blasted for Culture of Student Character Assassination: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Ode to Psychology Students: Are You Making A Major out of a Molehill: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Multicultural Fetish of Psychology Professors Belie Suppression of Individual Freedom, Ideas in Psychology: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Games without Frontiers: Ehrenfels Depicts Science of Psychology as ADHD: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Uses Evolutionary Theory, Natural Selection to Impugn D-Volving Psychology: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Reveals American Psychological Association as Lobbying Tour de Force: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Shares Bizarre Tale of Application for University Position: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Dreams & Dreaming Frequently Asked Questions: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Discusses Predictive Power of Tornado Dreams: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Releases Preface to Fireflies in the Shadow of the Sun: Wyatt Ehrenfels

In a Drugged States, New Mexico Legislators Give Psychologists Prescriptive Authority: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Fireflies in the Shadow of the Sun Press Release: Katheryn Moyer

Brad Jesness Exposes Malicious Stalking by Psychologists on Usenet: Brad Jesness

Psychology Majors Respond to Wyatt Ehrenfels fireflySun.com: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Offers Personality Taxonomy: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Offers Blueprint for Blighted Psychology: Wyatt Ehrenfels

From Position of Ignorance, APA Official Diverts Attention from/Urges Skepticism for, Wyatt Ehrenfels APPIC Discrimination Report: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Comes to Terms with Roiled Psychology Graduate Student and News Group Moderator: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Responses to Wyatt Ehrenfels Campaign to Reform Psychology: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Independent Publisher Offers Glowing Review of Fireflies in the Shadow of the Sun: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Teams with Psychotherapist Robert Roerich: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Says Psychology Professors Play Games with Rules: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Teams with Physicist Jeff Schmidt: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Malicious Stalking by Psychologists Abusing Psychotherapy News Group: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Reveals Groupthink, Abuse in Psychology Faculty Evaluation of Graduate Students: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Begins Sequel to Fireflies in the Shadow of the Sun: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Exposes Counseling Center Hiring Preference for Gays, Lesbians: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Diagnoses the Diagnosticians with the Shadow DSM: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Prominent UC-Davis Dream Researcher Dodges Wyatt Ehrenfels Draft of Reformers: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Teams with Management Consulting Maven R. Mallory Starr: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Overview of Wyatt Ehrenfels Dream Research with Cancer Patients: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Comments on the Short Falls of Teaching in Psychology: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Popular Psychotherapy All about Controlling Chaos: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Washington National Cathedral Site of Synchronicity in Novel by Social Psychologist: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Comments on the Value of a Degree in Psychology: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Offers Strategy for Self-Science of Dreams: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Attacks Psychology on Two Fronts: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Connie Vaughn Teams with Wyatt Ehrenfels to Explain Why She Is Not a Psychology: Connie Vaughn

Benjamin Willard Elected President of Wyatt Ehrenfels Fan Club: Benjamin Willard

Wyatt Ehrenfels Identifies Flaws in U.S. News Report of Psychology Employment Prospects: Wyatt Ehrenfels