Repressing Ehrenfels on a PSYCGRAD Listserv

Shortly after having been involuntarily unsubscribed from an APA listserv, Wyatt Ehrenfels received an e-mail tipping him off to an extraordinary measure by the listserv moderator to prevent any listserv participant, present and future, from accessing links to Ehrenfels's old posts. The tipster, a doctoral candidate with a master's degree whose name will be kept in confidence for her own protection, wrote: "What is happening with the PSYGRAD LISTSERV? I read your posting last night, and when I went back this morning to get more information on how they handle you, I found them not only denouncing you and disassociating from you, but they had apparently blocked previous postings of the listserv digest from being opened! Wow! Doesn't this just prove your point. So much fear and conformity, so controlling. Anyway, reading you last night gave me back some hope, after all these years of being ground down. Keep it up! I just wish you were not so prolix, as it takes too long to read you."

In a statement Thursday morning, the author, social psychologist, and student advocate read directly from a copy of his reply to the student: "Bless [her] for letting me know the APA resorted to such a measure. If [she] hadn't broken ranks, I would not have known the lengths to which representatives of this association were willing to go to ensure a captive audience. And make no mistake: those students are the property of the American Psychological Association and the university system. There is no shortage of hysterical psych profs and community administrators that I have to thank for some of my support, as it is their sensitivities and compulsions that drive many independently minded bystanders to my web site. Curiously, I post less frequently to their lists than virtually all their list participants, once every few months on average and by and large I steer clear of the bitter replies intended to drag me into a volley that will deluge inboxes and get me branded as an agitator. What I post consists largely of impersonal press reports surrounding my issue-driven initiative to improve Psychology education and research policy and procedure. For all these named reasons, I am dismayed that APA's list administrators should pander to persistent attempts to depict me as a source of harassment, even while multiple posts celebrate press clippings related to the recent appearance of vaunted social psychologist and former APA President Phil Zimbardo on CNN and MTV. I suspect that it occurred to them only recently to block my messages because they do not want anyone reading about my recent broadcast on OKTV. They bask in the reflected glory of one of their own ambassadors [Zimbardo], especially when he and other psychologists constantly look outward, directing their criticisms toward House Republicans and our President in what constitutes an upward comparison, hoping to grab their share of the media spotlight, but all the while their own house is crumbling from within and they are growing more vulnerable to "insignificant nobodies" like myself. I suspect that much of the anger I am absorbing from professionals and academics is attributable to the humiliating prospect that a single individual who supposedly couldn't compete for a tenure-track position could more than match wits with a better than 150,000+ member "professional community." I mean, I put them in a difficult position. If I am successful in inspiring change from within or bringing pressure to bear from without, a lot of psych profs will suddenly think as individuals, "hey, I could have done that. I wish I would have done that." Once the reform is enacted, they will jump aboard, embrace the change as property of their profession, and realize they could have authored it if only they had taken a break from playing "Survivor" or "Simon Says" to bring an ounce of independent thinking and courage to bear on the issue.

I wish they were able to exercise a measure of temperance or open-mindedness when it comes to alternative points of view but alas this is one of few disciplines without a critical tradition. I have known for a long time, since the beginning of my relationship with this community, of its capacity for repression and censorship, of its ability to manage a flow of information favorable to its point of view, of its ability to manage a common framework of expectations that minimizes the expenditure of energy required to understand and communicate, and of its inability to modulate its own affect as they are easily spurred by an opposing point of view to corrective i.e. retaliatory action."

The author's statement took a mildly self-deprecating tone as he addressed the student's final remark. "Sorry for the prolixity," he chortled. "I have some bad habits of my own. I fall in love with three different ways of saying the same thing and I can't resist the urge to represent them all in one complex-compound sentence or, better yet, in a series of complex-compound sentences, which may also explain why I don't think I can draft a 4-page version of my 232-page doctoral dissertation for submission to a trade journal, as my dissertation advisor once admonished. I wish this student the best of luck in her efforts to blend into a field about which she knows the worst."

Since this report launched on the fireflySun.com news page, it was learned that another graduate student on the list challenged list members to explain the reasoning behind the banishment of Ehrenfels ("Why can't we reflect on the content of his post or of anybody's post and not dismiss them out of hand for their style?"), contending that APA listserv administrators played right into Ehrenfels's hands when they booted him off the listserv. One of the load-bearing pillars in the Ehrenfels critique of Psychology is, as paraphrased by the student, "as a field, we [psychologists] have unthinkingly limited what we think about and what we consider acceptable as science." A list member with a history of belligerent responses to periodic posts from Ehrenfels attempted to preserve pretense to scholarship by tersely replying (to the student) "I have chosen to dismiss Ehrenfels' point after considerable thought." Notably absent from the reply was any insight into the thought process, again playing into Ehrenfels's characterization of an undiscerning community. The problem to which the one discerning individual referred is "the oppressive weight of the limitations we in Psychology place on our self-expression." The statement comes on the heels of similar sentiments expressed by the author: "We in the field of Psychology are notorious for seeing the world as a dichotomous universe of variables and contraints, and anything that varies we try to constrain. Perhaps in our oft-frustrating efforts to wrap our arms around this slippery human nature, we confounded our research methods with the subject of our research itself and thus demanded from ourselves as agents of research, education, and mental health delivery the same consistency and simplicity to which we ultimately want to reduce the complex phenomenological universe. But if this were not egregious enough, resulting in the exclusion of independent thinkers like me with an appetite to understand the complex phenomenological universe on its own terms, we further repress the criticisms of the expatriated thinker by demanding of his criticism that it meet strict requirements with respect to all kinds of periphera such as tenor, motive, style, and venue lest it be deemed 'inappropriate.'"

In the section below the author offers examples of defense mechanisms used by psych profs, practitioners, students, and miscellaneous non-degree-holding supplicants to defend the walls of their fiefdom.

What Ehrenfels Offers Psychology

My advice to many of you who contributed to this piece is to take a step back, take a breath, and try to get some perspective on this thing. I did not create my web site with the express purpose of upsetting or maligning individuals. This would be systemically impossible given my whole critique is based on the premise that I don't see any individuals (i.e. bounded and discretely thinking entities) in the psychological community. And since I do not address individuals specifically by name in my critique (with the exception of two high-profile psych profs widely tauted as representatives of the psychological community), you have the luxury of denying that any of my criticisms apply to you.

Having said this, I know many of you are personally affronted by my issue-driven criticism of the policies and procedures that serve load-bearing functions in your work. And while you may think I am forcing you to swallow a bitter pill, a more accurate and responsible understanding of my campaign includes what I offer Psychology in the way of opportunities for constructive change:

• Equality & Fidelity. I offer a more inclusive Psychology that accommodates those whose interests have been marginalized (ironically interests that the public correctly assumes to be most synonymous with the business of understanding the human condition).
  

• Freedom & The Pursuit of Truth. I offer an opportunity to plant our seeds and our flags in virgin soil. My point is that there is still room for pioneering in this field if only we relax some of our pointlessly parochial and counterproductive constraints. I am not legislating methods, which is to say, I am not forcing a personality theory or paradigm on anyone. I present my critique in a spirit best captured by terms like "liberation," "deregulation," and "decentralization."
  

• Immunity from Prosecution. In Ehrenfels is a living, vital source of ideas psych profs would embrace to their own benefit and, in so doing, spare themselves the time-consuming work of thinking up this stuff up, publicizing it and, in the process, accepting authorship for something that might otherwise pose risk to their careers.
  

• A Correction in the Market of Ideas. I am not only a natural condition of planet Psychology, but I serve as an external source of corrections for systemic biases in the psychological community. To conveniently dismiss me because I do not play in your sandbox and to judge me based on inhouse criteria (e.g., are my ideas published?) is to miss the point entirely.
  

However, knowing that many of you understand this, I remain dismayed that you should have such a problem with freedom, (a) unless of course you feel your success and happiness hinges on the failure and misery of others (which I know it does in many of your cases) or (b) unless of course you feel you won't know what to do when you are asked to compete in a free market of ideas in which people are not judged on the basis of how well they can follow instructions or imitate others. Now I realize many of you are thinking by this point, "what about option (c): our duty to uphold "scientific standards" in the "public interest"? But we all know we are neither NASA engineers nor beef inspectors. We are charged with the task of understanding the human condition, and we cover less ground in our search for the missing psyche when we are required to march in close proximity so that we can march in cadence. And you can't amass clues from the field when all the detectives are sequestered in "labs" (referring metaphorically here to our precipitously, excessively, and gratuitously formal insistence on confirmatory techniques and controls).

The Abuse of Ehrenfels

If you know me by now, and I know that you do, refrain from reading my posts if you know they will upset you. You are quick to grab that loudspeaker and urge everyone else in the community to ignore or delete my e-mail, so why not take some of your own advice? Is it possible that you do not practice what you preach because, despite your ranting that no one pays any attention to me, it haunts you that you cannot estimate the number of people who support me and that you only have yourself to blame for that? I will confirm your worst fears by telling you now that many people support me with a silence you yourself compelled when you publicly flogged the occasional bystander who dared to publicly defend my freedom of speech or declare a reservation of judgment. In such exemplary citizens, you find fault, subjecting their professional status and character to the same juvenile aspersions to which I am subjected, treating them as having been somehow "brainwashed" into Ehrenfels cronyism, or in the worst cases, judging them to be aliases of Ehrenfels himself (in effect stripping them of their identities so you can dismiss support for Ehrenfels and have them removed from a listserv). In any event, you subject them to harassment and defamation, and then use the silence of intimidated witnesses as evidence I have no substantial support. But behind your ranting are these gnawing doubts about an inestimable number of Ehrenfels supporters you yourself may have created, that you yourself may have driven underground, that you yourself may have compelled to contact me backchannel. And so contrary to your constant reminders that "see? no one supports this loser Ehrenfels," you persist in protesting at the shrillest pitch as if you were yelling to an army of supporters on a remote mountaintop. You are right to fear that you have alienated yourself from the community you once represented, and you wonder whether you will ever know if and when you find that you are the only one on your side of the fence. And so in an escalating cycle of paradoxical attention and hate speech, you find you have to persist in bringing down the man you unwittingly build up.

Offbeat but Typical Tactics Used against Ehrenfels

In a related matter, one list member protested another member's failure to use a subject header that accurately reflected the content of the message. No, the member had not complained that a post masquerading as an extension of an accepted thread concealed a message from or about Ehrenfels. Conversely, the poster overlooked changing an Ehrenfels's related subject header for a post that did not related to Ehrenfels. In a move that typifies the sensitivity and parochialism of the neurotic and personality-disordered psychologist, the complainant irascibly voiced his concern that the poster risked prolonging awareness of Ehrenfels.

On an unmoderated psychology-related "news group," it took five non-degree holding supplicants and one Iowa-based psychotherapist/forensic psychologist to protest the Ehrenfels OKTV press release. The complaints span the gamut of tactics and defense mechanisms:

• A doctoral candidate masks her chronic end run around the logic of Ehrenfels critique with this profanity-laced pretext (i.e. "the pout-and-sue approach is a real career fukker-upper") and presumption of Ehrenfels "untestable ideas." I can't even imagine to what ideas this doctoral candidate is referring, but she does her best to make it seem as if Ehrenfels is explicitly petitioning the psychological community for the right to build a career off untestable ideas. The primary thrust behind Ehrenfels is his interest in developing original but empirical methodologies to test hypotheses about phenomena, like dreaming, that psychologists have consigned to dim corners.
  

• One of the most venerable belligerents of the Internet Underground (UseNet's self-moniker) continues his six-month unsolicited stalking of Ehrenfels when he posts this ribald reference with menacing undertones: "I won't bother to pop your bubble, it would be too unkind, no one wants to smell a fart. bwahahahahahaha."
  

• And then there's this dizzying rant by an Iowa-based psychotherapist bent on disabusing the public of the suggestion Ehrenfels's appearance on OKTV was solicited by OKTV producers (i.e. "You weren't "asked," you jackass"). The psychotherapist then proceeded to direct his rage at the program's producers apparently for giving Ehrenfels the opportunity that broke the backs of all those seeking to dismiss him as a "kook" (i.e. "They don't even have a phone number any longer! Great people. It's a lousy "community access" channel"). The protest from the psychotherapist then deteriorated into typical "news group" hate-speech. Though you think he'd be contented to read that college professors are working to deny Ehrenfels access to their student population, apparently, he is greedy: "Nobody is trying anything. Nobody needs to "keep" you from reaching students. They don't care about a lamewit like you. They like to study science and literature. You off nothing but kookouts. What a looozer!!! At odds with your peers? You mean the cupie dolls in a circle? Surely you don't mean that serious researchers are your "peers?" Couldn't get in, could you? Maybe you and bradless the fut can sit in a White Castle and drown your sorrows together. The only doors that open for you are bathroom stalls. Thanks for the great kookout!!"
  

  I think this psychotherapist needs to realize that anyone with a PhD in Clinical Psychology has a job as long as he or she is at least willing to hang a shingle outside his or her home. Even if the clinical psychologist is unable to procure a staff or university position, or make inroads with a group practice, he or she could still conceivably practice and lay claim to employment (or plausibly deny un- or under-employment). If you have a research PhD, like myself, this is not an option. You are essentially operating in a restricted labor market limited to 12 university vacancies in any given month across the whole U.S. of A. In fact, across my previous two contract positions with non-psychology related companies, I found myself working alongside two colleagues with PhDs in Psychology. We are often the butt of affectionate humor from business analysts or developers who love to joke about how many Psych PhDs end up working for Starbucks.
  

  But if you read my critique carefully, you'll note that not being able to 'cut it' in this field is a mark of the best as well as the bad. The policies and procedures stemming from our philosophy of science and our educational business model reward mediocrity, hanging the medal of honor over the peak of the normal curve. But alas, I never even through my hat in the ring. I saw the writing on the wall, witnessed the systemic biases of the field at work through the fates of other applicants for tenure track positions, and learned some hard lessons about who and what psych profs are willing to let through the gates to their university. As might be expected, the price of membership and immortality (tenure) is too great. It would have cost me five things dear to my heart: freedom, truth, beauty, justice, and selfhood.
  

• One listserv participant is concerned the journalistic cache of the cable news-style fireflySun.com may be netting Ehrenfels undue credibility and attention, and so he offers this admonishing, implicitly threatening, message: "I glanced at the link in your latest self-promotion posting to the listserv, and I was struck by the familiarity of it. It took me a few seconds to realize that you have stolen the layout of CNN.com I would advise you to remove it or at least change it so that it isn't so obvious. Time Warner has deep pockets and I'm sure a small army of lawyers to combat copyright infringement."
  
  The fact you were the first person in thousands of recent reviewers to note the similarity suggests that it is not as striking as you suggest. The journalistic style of fireflySun.com NEWS was based on a strategic decision to show the psychological communities how Ehrenfels could succeed in drawing attention to their shortfalls by doing precisely what they do to survive: imitate. Not only is imitation by psych profs of other psych profs tolerated, it is the cornerstone of their philosophy of science and education. Not only do most psych departments requre their profs use textbooks, the organization and content of which is virtually indistinguishable among textbook authors, but in many cases, psych profs are pressured to use the same textbooks and department-approved syllabi. A psych prof is hard pressed to publish any research that does not extend the work of colleagues, and while that research, often described as a process of "filling holes in the organized body of knowledge," may celebrate the psychological community and dole out credit among one's peers through the minimum required "citations," we cannot estimate the adverse impact to the careers of researchers who want to explore an unpopular phenomenon or think outside the proverbial box. Mother Nature hid her easter eggs all over her property, but psych profs are all turning over the cushions to the same living room sofa. The production of knowledge in psychology is paced by our career timetable and further impaired by the associated shallowness. If oceanographers studied only what they caught in their nets on a single pass by speedboat of the surface of the water just off the pier, we would know virtually nothing about the deep. All this expedient and efficient manualization, standardization, and pressure to uniformity works well for those who ultimately stake their claim to a career in Psychology, and it certainly dealt this deep-sea diver, so I figure I would resort to similiar imitation and superficiality in packaging my very un-imitative and penetrating criticisms for delivery to the public. A news page helps me to fight fire with fire, to give psychological researchers, whose vaunted research amounts to little more than derivative drivel, a little taste of their own medicine. I suppose I should not be surprised that the psychological communtity does not recognize its own modus operandi in (what you deem) the ill-gotten attention and credibility of my ideas.
  

  But even when I emulate, I can't break old habits and urges to innovate. You will not find on CNN.com my store slideshow, banner and breaking news graphics, dynamic news display, and images. While the nav bar has the most strikingly similiar form, the color, functionality, and text are unique.
  

• And last but not least (no reason to try to find the lesser of five zeros) is the e-mail from one doctoral candidate accusing Ehrenfels of both self-pity and egotism. No, this is not a contradiction. He is apparently the next in a series of psych denizens to fear Ehrenfels is winning ill-gotten audiences by portraying himself as a martyr. One would think the psych community would be content to know that Ehrenfels feels his career ambitions have been defeated, but alas, this is a greedy community (and their greed is most evident in their efforts to control the few students who do not conform). Just one week after someone tearfully protested that some people were viewing Ehrenfels as a "martyr," Ehrenfels receives this: "It is your perception of being a victim that is in question. when in fact it appears that your behavior of violating norms rather then bringing up your concerns in venues of true critical thinking and theoretical debate appears to create the problem you complain about. Nietzsche 'Whenever I climb I am followed by a dog called 'Ego'' Your Dog appears to be leading and it has fleas. As Groucho said 'I've had a wonderful time, but this wasn't it.' and I have no more time for your foolishness."
  

  I don't know how I could possibly refute both Nietzsche and Groucho (the other Marx revered by psych profs). But he seeks to dismiss me on the grounds I do not raise my concerns in Psychology-approved venues of "true critical thinking." Point to pointless guy! Hello? My whole point is that Psychology lacks a critical tradition and that its prejudices, both systemic and human, do not tolerate alternative points of view or valid approaches to various aspects of knowledge production. He also refers to my violations of norms and, I can only imagine that he is referring here to posting to a listserv that has a policy prohibiting advertising. In my opinion, if I have to exercise a little civil disobedience in violating a petty norm that serves only to protect far more egregious violations of justice by its own creators, then so be it! First of all, these so-called norms are not consistently enforced, being reserved mainly for people whose posts are connected to alternative points of view, which is emblematic of how psych profs reserve the right to enforce "at will" policies and procedures in taking punitive actions against students or colleagues they do not like. Secondly, denizens of the psych world (including psych profs, professionals, students, and non-degree holding supplicants), jump too quickly and too irascibly at the opportunity to treat me as if I were hawking Generic Viagra on a Girl Scout listserv. Once reserved for commercial posts, the prohibition was expanded to advertisements of any kind, including all self-promotion (largely to prevent me from mailing links to one of my news reports). Anything that smacks of pride or rugged individualism is now prohibited on the grounds that pure egotism is a form of self-advertising. The belligerent source of the complaint was correct in the assessment he proferred in the first of his two protests (incidentally, one objection to my "SPAM" would have been sufficient, especially when he is arguing that my single post deluges inboxes). In that original e-mail he characterized my web site and post as "marketing" and "impression management." When one such as I serves as a coordinator of a reform initiative, one has to package one's message, and this involves graphical and rhetorical (presentational) elements that meet aesthetic and motivational requirements. I have been strategic, yes, but not egotistical; but beyond that, I disagree with his assumption that the egotism of the messenger is an excuse to invalidate the message. The contributions of many leaders and innovators throughout history would have been lost if we adopted this prohibition on ego. If there's one thing I've learned from academic life, it's that charges of 'egotism' are usually made to plug leaks in one's own self-esteem. What this guy sees as my "ego" is apparently a source of discomfort for him. But please bear in mind that my work is an expression of a persona, the "Wyatt Ehrenfels" persona to be precise. Any clinical psychologist with a background in personality theory would understand the difference between ego and persona, as many of the classic theories compartmentalize these structures.
  

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

Onion of Obstacles Awaits Psychology Majors: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Depicts Psychology Prejudiced against Psyche: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Newsweek Report Surveys Dream Research Wasteland: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Assails Culture of Student Character Assassination in Psychology: Wyatt Ehrenfels

Wyatt Ehrenfels Depicts Psychology as Bloated Minor: Wyatt Ehrenfels

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

Wyatt Ehrenfels Depicts Psychology Research as Games without Frontiers, ADHD Science: 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

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