The Foundation of Distorted Psychology: Psychological Sects, Hypocrisy, and the Transfer of Values

1.1 Psychology-Sects: Neo-Religion

The contemporary landscape of psychology, upon rigorous and objective scrutiny, reveals a structural and operational congruence with religious or spiritual sects. A substantial portion of psychological practices and theoretical frameworks, far from representing objective science in its purest form, are more aptly categorised as psychological-sects. An individual's alignment with a particular psychology-sect is rarely a matter of purely rational, conscious selection. Instead, this allegiance is profoundly and subtly dictated by a confluence of factors, including their intrinsic mindset, historical social and personal conditioning, and an array of relevant environmental and cognitive influences.

While traditional religious and spiritual denominations manifest as distinct, structured, and readily identifiable organisations—permitting individuals a clear choice regarding affiliation or non-affiliation—psychological-denominations are far more imperceptible and pervasive. They operate predominantly beneath the threshold of conscious thought. Consequently, without a consistent, disciplined commitment to genuine mindfulness and sustained introspection, an individual remains largely oblivious to the specific psychological denomination that unconsciously resides within their psyche, silently yet powerfully shaping and directing their thoughts, emotional responses, and overt behaviour.

The attainment of true objective-analysis is fundamentally contingent upon the adoption of an objective scientific-approach. It is only through the capacity for objective-analysis that one can meaningfully and seriously engage in introspection. These two processes are not separate but inextricably linked: an individual who possesses the genuine capacity for objective-analysis cannot simultaneously and wilfully choose to abstain from introspection. Once the faculty for honest introspection is authentically developed, it ceases to be a mere practice and transforms into an inherent, intrinsic quality of one's entire being, manifesting naturally and spontaneously in all areas of life.

The current scope of psychological research is fundamentally constrained and limited. It does not—and arguably cannot—encompass a comprehensive, moment-by-moment documentation of every minute detail of an individual's life, commencing from the moment of conception and extending through to their eventual demise. This critical deficiency includes the precise recording of their complex, real-time decision-making processes, the entire spectrum of their actions and reactions, the genuine, often concealed thoughts and feelings they internally experience, and the intricate emotions held deep within their psyche. From the instant of birth, throughout the challenging journey of growth, and across a lifespan spanning eight, nine, or more decades, there is an undeniable lack of precisely recorded, objective information detailing their private thoughts, nuanced cognitive processes, and the explicit criteria underpinning their countless decisions, up to the very last moment of their existence. Furthermore, there is no discernible, consistent, and documented correlation or distinction between a person's actual intrinsic character, the character they demonstrate in practical, lived scenarios, and the idealised character they outwardly project for social acceptance. The sheer, unquantifiable volume of deliberate or unconscious lies a person tells, the subtle and overt manipulations they employ daily—this type of essential psychological data simply cannot be precisely or comprehensively recorded. There are an uncountable number of spontaneous actions and reactions where we, as individuals, remain completely unaware of the actual data, the genuine underlying motivations, involved in our own behaviour.

A significant, often profound, disparity invariably exists between our internal feelings, covert thoughts, and our external actions and observable behaviours. This inherent chasm starkly illuminates the substantial difference between our genuine, underlying character and the highly selective persona we consciously or unconsciously present to the external world. This fundamental inconsistency is most plainly evident in the inconsistent standards we apply: we habitually treat certain select individuals differently—with a greater measure of deference, patience, tolerance, or respect—compared to others who fall outside that preferred, narrow group, even when the underlying context and circumstances are remarkably and objectively similar.

“In traditionally devout societies, such as various communities across India, religious and spiritual teachers wield a profound and often unquestioned influence, effectively conditioning the deeply held beliefs, existential worldview, and resultant practical behaviours of the general populace. A vast number of individuals follow these charismatic figures mindlessly, without engaging in critical thought or genuine, personal examination. Conversely, in many Western societies, where a significant demographic often self-identifies as possessing a conscious, evolved, and purely rational mindset, there is a prevalent tendency to mock the seemingly blind adherence to spiritual or religious beliefs. However, this very Western demographic often adheres with an equally uncritical, fervent faith to books penned by authors who powerfully mirror or reinforce their existing, preferred mindset. This practice, particularly pronounced in influential fields like parenting and popular psychology, serves as a powerful, albeit often unacknowledged, form of sophisticated conditioning. It is absolutely crucial to recognise that the majority of writers who produce these influential, life-shaping books base their entire philosophy primarily on their own personal, historical conditioning, their specific mindset, and their subjective, idiosyncratic life experiences.

Although the external appearance or ‘cover’ of these two seemingly disparate situations—the blind following of a guru versus the uncritical following of a popular psychology book—may differ dramatically, the underlying psychological essence, the fundamental mechanism of blind, unexamined adherence, remains functionally identical. The followers of religious and spiritual gurus systematically establish various sects, each characterised by its own distinct set of beliefs, rituals, and practices. Similarly, within the vast, fragmented field of psychological techniques and theories, individuals with diverse and often conflicting mindsets consistently and unintentionally form numerous unacknowledged and hidden factions*—these are the psychological sects.*

Despite the superficial similarities in modern psychological terminology, standardised living conditions, readily available material facilities, and contemporary social mannerisms, there exists an ironic and pronounced lack of true equality, genuine equity, and authentic harmony. True, heartfelt tolerance is often conspicuously absent, replaced instead by a superficial, performed pretense of being 'very tolerant' and 'open-minded.' Conversely, there is a significant, pervasive presence of deep-seated discrimination, entrenched arrogance, and a prevailing, often unconscious, mindset focused obsessively on exerting control and dominance over others. Yet, this toxic environment is frequently and falsely portrayed by its inhabitants as 'living as a family,' 'living in love,' or 'living with mutual respect and understanding.' This deeply misguided and self-deceptive perspective fundamentally prevents individuals from truly embodying the profound essence of a purposeful life, as they arrogantly perceive themselves to be inherently superior, morally righteous, entirely rational, deeply thoughtful, and utterly exceptional, all without truly grasping or authentically manifesting the foundational values underpinning such qualities.”

The way individuals perceive, interpret, and ultimately understand the complex tapestry of life is significantly and indelibly shaped by their conscious or unconscious affiliation with religious or spiritual denominations, as adherence to these specific groups inherently necessitates adopting a unique, predefined, and often restrictive perspective. People belonging to these defined communities primarily filter and interpret the entire world through the established ideologies, narratives, and prescriptive rituals they consistently follow.

In a strikingly similar fashion, psychological sects exhibit an identical, powerful pattern: individuals perceive and process life almost exclusively through the narrow, subjectively coloured lens of their chosen psychological sect. Much like the ubiquitous existence of self-proclaimed gurus and spiritual leaders in the religious/spiritual community, who possess the formidable power to influence and fundamentally shape people's mindset, life-vision, and critical analytical power, the field of psychology harbours its own influential figures—known as popular writers, theorists, and analysts—who possess the subtle, often insidious ability to manipulate the fundamental mindset, the entire life-vision, and the critical analytical power of their devoted followers. Just as religious and spiritual denominations frequently harbour deeply ingrained discriminatory attitudes toward individuals who do not share the same beliefs or perspectives, psychological denominations also have a pronounced and often unacknowledged tendency to foster and perpetuate similar discriminatory biases and intellectual insularity.

If a writer, theorist, or analyst in the influential field of psychology fundamentally lacks a profound, lived comprehension of core life values, neglects to apply a truly objective scientific approach in their work, or operates primarily from a self-centric, egocentric, or discriminatory mindset, then their resultant thoughts, analyses, and perspectives will inevitably be deeply and fundamentally subjective, regardless of any superficial, well-crafted displays of modesty, objectivity, or false positivity. Consequently, even if a psychological theory gains the allegiance of hundreds of millions of followers and becomes globally popular, it is the underlying, unacknowledged negativity, the author's inherent arrogance, the latent discrimination, the pervasive self-centricity, the subtle manipulation, and other similar toxic factors inherent in the author's core mindset that will ultimately and powerfully shape and mold the character of both society and its constituent individuals, not the surface-level teachings.

Our individual psychology is the complex, cumulative product of societal conditioning, formal and informal training systems, and a multitude of other environmental and internal factors that collectively contribute to and define our overall mindset. In societies where individuals perceive themselves as being inherently superior—whether due to wealth, education, race, or creed—they often unconsciously extend this belief to perceive their own psychology and worldview as inherently superior as well. Books written under the banner of psychology, particularly those focusing on children’s upbringing, behaviour modification, and developmental milestones, are fundamentally founded upon the mindset, the conditioning, the personal training, and the subjective life-vision of their respective authors and analysts. It is currently, and perhaps perpetually, not possible to conduct any psychological research that can definitively and accurately predict the precise future behaviour of a child with absolute certainty. In the highly unlikely and theoretical event that such perfect prediction becomes a reality, the individuals resulting from such deterministic, precise conditioning will predominantly be functional 'robots' in human form, rather than fully realised, complex, and free-willed human beings.

1.2 Hypocrisy, Distortion: The Psychological Inheritance

The events we witness throughout our childhood, coupled with our parents' nuanced responses to those specific contexts and their general daily activities, exert a powerful, often entirely subconscious, controlling influence over our developing brain and neural pathways. For the vast majority of people, it proves virtually impossible to fully sever ties with the ingrained rituals, deeply held beliefs, formative ideologies, and psychological mindsets that take root during the critical period of childhood development. Most individuals simply accept and internalise these attitudes and ways of life as inherently normal, correct, and unquestionable. The initial foundation and subtle transmission of these ideas originate directly with our parents, immediate family, family friends, and extended relatives. Because these primary caregivers are themselves inextricably affected by the various ideologies of some entrenched religion or a pervasive psychology-sect, we are introduced to those ideologies either overtly through instruction or covertly through observation and imitation. It is those who habitually neglect to engage in genuine and deep introspection who find themselves utterly unable to escape the psychological clutches of these early influences for the entirety of their lives. Ironically, rather than seeking to oppose or forcefully break free from these psychological clutches, they often embrace and even take a misguided sense of pride in their lifelong adherence to them.

In an era characterised by easily attainable, comfortable, and increasingly secure lives, coupled with unprecedented access to higher education, societal evolution, pronounced progressiveness, and the widespread emphasis on logical thinking, the optimal development for our children necessitates a genuine, serious, and deeply personal commitment. This commitment inherently involves holding ourselves personally accountable, demonstrating unwavering dedication, and actively working to identify, confront, and eliminate any subconscious psychological cavities, negative behavioural patterns, or harmful influences within our own character. Paradoxically, despite the supposed evolution of our species, our innate, default preference often leans strongly toward entrenched self-centricity, a fragile ego, deep-seated discrimination, and a pervasive desire for controlling the lives of others.

It is a profound personal responsibility for every individual to determine, without the comfort of self-deception or pretense, whether they truly possess genuine education, authentic civilization, and a sincere adherence to the core values of life. The criteria for being considered truly civilised and value-driven must be established by placing paramount, uncompromising emphasis on values that unequivocally encompass true honesty and sincere integrity. A bedrock foundation of sincerity and truthfulness is the absolute prerequisite for admitting one's mistakes and genuinely rectifying them. Our fundamental character and intrinsic value as individuals should never be judged by superficial, external factors such as the expense of our attire, the luxury of our living conditions, the availability of advanced facilities and safety measures, the quality of the food we consume, or the frequency and type of leisure activities we choose to pursue.

Yet, most of us, knowingly or unknowingly, exert immense, constant effort to mould our children into precise reflections of our own flawed selves. Consequently, we often find ourselves indulging in a sense of false pride regarding our parenting methods, rather than acknowledging and seeing the serious, often fundamental flaws in the way we raise our children; we ironically and arrogantly believe we are performing a 'great job.' Only those individuals who possess a deeply discriminatory and profoundly arrogant mindset can feel a sense of pride in being willingly trapped by a distorted psychology, rather than humbly embracing the demanding path of personal growth achieved through the honest acknowledgment and sincere rectification of their mistakes.

1.3 Examples of Hypocrisy, Distortion in Practice

While a countless number of examples illustrating psychological distortion and outright hypocrisy unfold around us daily, the focus here is to present a few highly illustrative, archetypal scenarios, rather than attempting to provide an exhaustive, encyclopaedic analysis. The specific purpose of this focused approach is to engage the reader's own common sense and activate their critical thinking abilities. These examples may initially appear very common, trivial, or insignificant. However, if we fail to engage in constant, rigorous introspection, these seemingly ordinary elements possess the subtle, insidious, and pervasive power to shape, control, and exert a profound and lasting influence over our personality and foundational mindset.

1.3.1 Examples — Children and the Distorted Curriculum

Example 01: The Illusion of "Sharing" vs. The Business Transaction

Some years ago, my son, Aadi, was approximately one and a half years old. I had established a disciplined, daily routine of taking him to various public playgrounds across Sydney, carrying him securely in a child-carrier backpack that also meticulously housed all his essentials and several of his favourite toys. One day, at a busy playground, a woman arrived with her own child, who appeared to be slightly older than Aadi. The woman's child strongly fixated on and desired one of Aadi's specific toys and became quite vocal and insistent about having it.

I engaged Aadi in a calm, thoughtful conversation, asking if he would kindly consider giving his toy to the other child. Aadi, demonstrating his naturally humble and unconditioned demeanour characteristic of early childhood, not only willingly agreed but personally presented the toy to the child with no expectation. As soon as the woman witnessed this genuine act of giving, she immediately reached into her purse, retrieved a small, alternative toy, and began to forcefully offer it to Aadi.

Curiosity, driven by a desire to challenge the prevailing psychological narrative, prompted me to ask why she was engaging in this action. She referred to her action as sharing. I immediately disagreed, arguing firmly that her action was not sharing but rather an exchange, a literal business transaction disguised by a feel-good label.

For me, the true purpose of teaching my child about sharing focuses on cultivating genuine life values that transcend mere transactional behaviour or trades, profoundly emphasising the true, selfless essence of the concept. Unfortunately, the woman failed entirely to grasp the philosophical and psychological distinction I was making. Eventually, due to her own child's continued insistence, she simply took Aadi’s toy without offering one in exchange, demonstrating her true transactional belief system.

Many people, not limited to that specific woman, consistently fail to comprehend the true significance and profound psychological impact of genuine, selfless sharing. Our fundamental approach to life values often involves a deep-seated, unconscious pattern of imitating the superficial behaviours of our parents and the broader community, which we subsequently, without critical thought, pass down to our children. We frequently neglect to pause and genuinely contemplate whether the label we attach to our actions accurately captures their essence, or if their true, underlying nature fundamentally diverges from the positive label we ascribe.

During our conversation, I clearly outlined four distinct forms of what is universally and loosely called "sharing," forcefully stressing the importance of moving beyond habitual self-centricity:

1. True Sharing (Selfless Sacrifice): This embodies the purest, most authentic essence of sharing. My child possesses only a single item, and genuinely requires it for his own use, but directly in front of him is someone in greater, verifiable need. My child selflessly, unconditionally, and without hesitation gives it to the person. This is the gold standard.
2. Normal Sharing (Conditional, but Commendable): We possess numerous surplus items in the same category, and we use them occasionally. We choose to share some of these surplus items because the other person is in need. While this falls into a normal, commendable category, many individuals mistakenly and arrogantly perceive this simple act as a significant personal sacrifice or a grand gesture of altruism.
3. Surplus/Unwanted Sharing (Self-Serving Altruism): Sharing becomes psychologically relevant when we possess a multitude of items of the same kind, or when we have become tired or bored of the existing items and are consciously or subconsciously desiring a fresh, new collection. Our primary motivation is to find a convenient solution for getting rid of these unwanted or surplus items. We give them to others. However, it is a widespread and common occurrence for individuals involved in this type of exchange to harbour the arrogance of perceiving themselves as morally great due to their participation in "sharing," despite the undeniable fact that the fundamental character of their sharing is inherently subpar and predominantly self-serving.
4. Reciprocal Sharing (Exchange/Trade): This practice, although widely used, immensely popular, and socially encouraged, does not truly encompass the selfless essence of genuine sharing. A substantial segment of society enthusiastically embraces this form of sharing and dutifully teaches it to their children. It often evokes a misplaced feeling of cultural pride, but the principle of reciprocity is fundamentally and inherently applied—an unconscious or conscious expectation to obtain something of equal or greater value in return. Despite its popularity and its social labelling as a "sharing concept," it is fundamentally and unequivocally an exchange or a trade.

The very act of teaching children the 03 (Surplus/Unwanted) and 04 (Reciprocal) types of "sharing," whether performed by parents or reinforced by society, has a high potential to inadvertently result in the development of profound, toxic discriminatory and arrogant tendencies in children's future characters. Furthermore, many individuals choose to label their core self-centric character as an elevated sense of 'Accountability to Self' instead of embracing the brutally honest term self-centricity, simply because the latter term directly conflicts with and shatters their cherished sense of psychological superiority and inflated ego.

Example 02: The Encouragement of Falsehood: Prioritising Comfort Over Integrity

A child, who was both mentally healthy and intellectually knowledgeable about proper bathroom habits, consciously chose to urinate in his pants at school out of sheer, momentary laziness or distraction. Observing the visible wet pants, his mother, arriving for the scheduled pickup, questioned him directly. The child promptly fabricated a lie, stating that water had accidentally spilled on him. Once the mother detected the unmistakable odour of urine, she confirmed the lie. Probably influenced by her own distorted upbringing or some popular but profoundly distorted psychology-sect, the mother consciously chose not to address the lie or the underlying issue of laziness. In making this choice, she unintentionally or intentionally created a psychological environment that profoundly encouraged the child to habituate lying as a primary mechanism for evading inconvenience or responsibility.

In stark contrast, as a truly responsible parent, I would immediately and firmly address the entire situation. I would engage in a serious, non-punitive conversation with my child about the importance of taking full responsibility for the effort required to use the toilet, rather than lazily wetting his pants. A key, non-negotiable lesson would be the intrinsic significance of accepting and genuinely rectifying mistakes, irrespective of any potential judgment, discomfort, or temporary teasing from peers. Only after the honest and sincere acceptance of a mistake can there be a genuine wish to correct it. If we categorically refuse to accept and rectify our mistakes, we are left with no psychological choice but to resort to falsehoods, complex manipulations, and elaborate cover stories. As we grow and mature, the tendency to fabricate lies and employ manipulative situations increases exponentially, eventually gaining total, subconscious control over our character. If we prioritise the fleeting opinions of others and choose to consistently fabricate lies, dishonesty, and manipulative situations over genuine integrity and core life values, we inevitably and rapidly descend down an insidious path of immorality, deceit, and profound self-deception.

It was deeply ironic that when I shared the full details of this incident with one of my European friends, they immediately and staunchly defended the mother's inaction, stating that my suggested approach—addressing the lie and the laziness—would be entirely incorrect and potentially traumatic. While my friend vehemently disagreed, I firmly believe that my stand is unequivocally in the best, long-term interest of the child's psychological growth and overall personality development, even if it causes him temporary inconvenience or emotional discomfort in the moment. The level of self-centrism and comfort-worship in our modern society has reached such a critical, pervasive point that individuals are now routinely resorting to lying, manipulating others, and emotional insensitivity, all in a desperate effort to evade even the smallest inconveniences or discomforts. It is astonishing to observe how easily we can be thrown into a state of panic, trauma, or emotional crisis, even by the slightest disruption to our meticulously maintained sense of physical or psychological comfort.

Example 03: The Cultivation of Insensitivity: Prioritising Ego Over Empathy

Another profoundly unsettling example involved a seven-year-old primary school child whose father routinely picked him up after school. One day, the father was slightly delayed, by approximately 10 to 15 minutes. As soon as the father arrived at the pickup point, he humbly and immediately asked the child for forgiveness for his lateness. However, the child responded with profound silence and a clearly visible, sustained expression of anger and petulance.

The father then explained, in detail, that while on his way from his office to pick up the child, his car had been involved in a serious accident. He showed the child some of his minor injuries, explained the intense, throbbing pain in his head, and meticulously detailed how he had gone back home, collected the child's bicycle, and then walked the remaining distance to the school. Despite this intense physical effort and clear sign of dedication, he was 10-15 minutes late and was expressing profound, repeated apologies. In spite of fully understanding the gravity of the situation—the car accident, the father's verifiable injuries, and the great effort involved in walking—the child remained completely indifferent to his father's physical suffering, choosing instead to sustain and prioritise his expression of anger and self-pity. The father, despite his verifiable physical pain and emotional distress, continued to repeatedly apologise.

In essence, it is the previous generation of parents who instilled a self-centric mindset in us, and now, we are inadvertently passing on an even more extreme, highly self-centric, and brutally insensitive attitude to our own children. Our profound, core insensitivity is often seamlessly camouflaged by the empty rhetoric of manufactured humility and superficial rationality, allowing us to remain completely oblivious to our rapidly increasing cruelty and patent lack of true, lived empathy. We frequently follow mechanical, rote, and unthinking psychological principles in our parenting techniques, entirely neglecting the deliberate and necessary development of genuine, foundational human values, which are messy and uncomfortable.

Example 04: Routine Over Human Need: The Tyranny of the Schedule

Several years ago, I was present in a house filled with playing toddlers. The parents had scheduled a routine evening bath time for their children at a specific, non-negotiable time that aligned perfectly with their own convenience. Simultaneously, an adult visitor in the house experienced a strong, immediate, and urgent urge to relieve themselves and needed to use the bathroom facility instantly. However, their pressing physiological need was abruptly and ruthlessly halted by the parents, who insisted that it was the children's designated bath time. The adult was explicitly told they could only use the bathroom once the children had completely finished bathing. Given that these particular children often engaged in extended, luxurious bathtub play, sometimes lasting an hour or more, this constituted a significant and potentially harmful delay. It is relatively easy to deviate from or change a bathing schedule, but attempting to forcibly suppress the urgent, physiological urge to defecate can be extremely challenging, intensely uncomfortable, and potentially detrimental to one's physical health. The parents were simply not accustomed to tolerating any deviation whatsoever from their meticulously designed routine for their children, likely because any such disruption might cause a moment of discomfort for the parents themselves and lead to crippling feelings of panic or a perceived loss of total control.

While people with a dominant self-centric mindset may dismiss this as a common and trivial matter, it is absolutely crucial to acknowledge that these seemingly small, mundane events hold immense psychological value in expressing and nurturing the foundational, core mindset of both children and the adults who raise them. As time progresses, we gradually become more rigidly self-centric, leading to a corresponding and measurable decrease in our tolerance for any form of discomfort or inconvenience. This relentless pursuit of comfort-at-all-costs leads us to a heightened, toxic state where we not only engage in invisible cruelty for the sake of our own uninterrupted comfort, but we also begin to derive a perverse, subconscious enjoyment from the act of control and denial. Furthermore, we genuinely and deeply convince ourselves that our actions are morally justified, absolutely righteous, and scientifically correct. Through our habitual actions and our selective teachings, we inadvertently instil profoundly self-centric, discriminatory, arrogant, and insensitive traits in our children's developing personalities. Despite our consistent, rote instruction of superficial words like please, excuse me, pardon me, thank you, and I love you throughout the day, the fundamental, psychological reality remains that we ultimately shape and mould our children's core behaviour in alignment with our own underlying, often deeply flawed, beliefs and values, not the words we tell them to use.

1.3.2 Examples — Parents and the Cycle of Psychological Distortion

Example 01: The Control-Centric Parent and the Weaponisation of Psychology

From the moment their child was born, the husband harboured a relentless, all-consuming desire for total, absolute control over all aspects of child-rearing, constantly inventing plausible pretexts, utilising 'psychological' jargon, and escalating arguments to forcefully assert his unilateral authority. Despite superficial pretences of collaboration to his wife, his true, hidden agenda was to have complete, unilateral control over every single decision regarding their parenting journey. The husband's underlying mindset, though he was completely unaware of it himself, was unmistakably discriminatory, pathologically controlling, and laced with the arrogance of perceived intellectual superiority. Despite his wife's consistent, emotional protests and natural, human reactions, the husband remained pathologically indifferent and arrogantly dismissive. The wife continued her firm opposition, anchored by her deep-rooted, sincere belief in the core values of love, marital trust, and unwavering dedication within her marriage. As time inevitably passed, the husband's controlling behaviour intensified, but the wife found a compensatory, psychological space and a feeling of control in the private moments she was alone with their child while the husband was conveniently at work. The husband tolerated his wife's opposition and her solitary time, knowing she was the primary caregiver at home and that he maintained ultimate authority.

However, the domestic situation took a drastic and terminal turn for the worse with the sudden onset of the COVID virus pandemic, when the husband was forced to begin working from home permanently. For years, the mother and child had established a rhythm and lived together harmoniously during the weekdays, and the mother had developed a strong, intuitive, and practical understanding of how to properly care for her child. Yet, once the husband started working from home, he would constantly and deliberately interrupt his work, running frantically from his desk to the child, even for the smallest, most trivial matters, as if the child's mother had committed a grave, immediate offense or was fundamentally incompetent. Since the very first day, these controlling interventions occurred multiple times daily. Although the mother vehemently and clearly opposed such overreach and insult to her motherhood, her husband, who had consistently ignored her dissent since the child's birth, ruthlessly persisted. A deeply awkward, toxic, and utterly humiliating situation unfolded daily in front of the wife, preventing her from finding even a brief, genuine moment to live life on her own terms with her child.

The child, who initially perceived them as two equal and loving parents, inevitably came to understand that his father held the true, unquestionable power and authority, viewing his mother as merely a secondary caretaker lacking any significant, enforceable control over him—a devastating mindset easily developed by children around the vulnerable ages of three to four years old. Over time, the child began to develop sophisticated manipulative behaviour that intentionally or unintentionally influenced his father to run from his work desk to inquire about his well-being, effectively joining the father in controlling the mother.

The father's blindness, caused entirely by his entrenched arrogance and discriminatory mindset of psychological superiority, fundamentally prevented him from acknowledging the severe and chronic emotional harm he inflicted upon the child's mother. His continuous, intervening behaviour consistently insulted her self-esteem, aggressively undermined her authority, and abused her core maternal instincts. The profound irony is that the father's level of arrogance and self-delusion was so exaggerated and toxic that he genuinely interpreted his wife's completely natural opposition and emotional reaction to his destructive behaviour as an insult to his self-esteem and a form of unacceptable abuse against him.

Despite the worsening, toxic circumstances, the husband deliberately neglected to have a proper, honest, and open discussion with his wife. Instead of engaging in open, vulnerable communication and seeking resolution, he chose instead to seek counsel and validation from friends and relatives who conveniently shared his exact same self-centric, controlling, and psychologically distorted mindset. Instead of encouraging him toward a constructive resolution, they consistently fostered and reinforced his existing discriminatory, controlling, and arrogant tendencies. The toxic, biased advice from these individuals led directly to circumstances that ultimately resulted in the inevitable and acrimonious dissolution of the family unit. The greater irony is that the child's father, along with his relatives and friends, now takes a profound, twisted pride in the outcome, deeming what occurred as "highly favourable" and a "win." With the specific intention of asserting his total dominance, the father employed deceptive tactics and complex manipulations, effectively rendering the mother powerless, voiceless, and utterly disenfranchised in regards to all of the child's affairs, with the unwavering, collective support of his family and friends.

The outcome would have varied significantly and dramatically if the father of the child did not possess a distorted psychology, if he lacked a discriminatory and controlling mindset, if he was not fundamentally arrogant, and if he was not toxically self-centric. If he truly possessed a deep, genuine respect for his wife, along with authentic love and unwavering marital dedication, he would have taken the necessary initiative to comprehend the underlying psychological causes for his wife's opposition and subsequent emotional reaction, which would have compelled him to engage in difficult, honest introspection. Instead of exacerbating his existing mistakes, he had the clear, human option to choose the path of acknowledging them, humbly rectifying them, and preventing further, irreparable harm.

Example 02: Psychology-Sect-Driven Reproduction: Mechanical Parenting

A woman constantly and openly criticised her boyfriend from the very beginning of their relationship, often publicly humiliating him in front of her family and friends. Contrary to all rational expectations, she gave birth to her first child while still living with the man she continually and openly criticised. Subsequently, the intensity, frequency, and sheer hateful nature of her criticism dramatically and measurably increased. I received information about the situation that was strictly one-sided, coming exclusively from her perspective, and I hold the strong conviction that this information was extensively manipulated, selectively filtered, and psychologically distorted for her benefit. The woman explicitly stated that she could not spend even a single moment in the presence of that man, expressing feelings of deep disgust and revulsion towards him and claiming no emotional or physical attachment whatsoever.

Despite everything, this woman made the calculated decision to bring a second child into the world because it perfectly aligned with the prescriptive belief system of the specific Psychology-Sect she rigidly adhered to. This sect posits a mechanical, unverified theory that having at least two children from the same biological parents positively and automatically contributes to the children's optimal psychological development and sibling harmony. Adhering blindly to this mechanical, uncritical belief, she went directly against her intense personal feelings and gave birth to two children from a man she openly despised. Once the second child was born, she immediately decided to formally end the romantic relationship and issued an ultimatum, instructing the biological father to function strictly as a scheduled babysitter for a few mandatory hours per day. The children's biological father now visits the woman's house daily for a strictly time-limited period of two to four hours, engaging with the children. The woman's rigid belief system posits that children require the mere, mechanical presence of a living being, conveniently referred to as a "father." Consequently, she has mechanically and bureaucratically arranged a father for her children for a few non-negotiable hours. When it comes to all serious decision-making, all consequential matters are handled exclusively by the woman, while the father is only 'allowed' to make highly superficial and spontaneous decisions about toys or immediate play. This woman's mindset is so profoundly distorted that she truly believes she possesses exclusive, divine rights to make all significant decisions about her children, displaying profoundly discriminatory, controlling, and intensely arrogant behaviour that is masked by 'psychological' necessity.

This woman perceives herself as a self-anointed expert in psychology, often conducting maliciously distorted and highly subjective psychological assessments of any individuals she holds animosity towards. Her way of life holds great, destructive allure for those who inherently possess a self-centric and pathologically controlling mindset, coupled with pronounced arrogant tendencies and only superficial adherence to life-values. The destructive consequences of her frequently dispensed psychological advice have been far-reaching, demonstrably leading to the breakdown and dissolution of many otherwise potentially happy families, all without any serious, personal accountability for the subconscious-level disturbances, confusion, and relational trauma she causes in the innocent children involved. The sincere, true psychology expert, in contrast, approaches issues with profound seriousness and integrity, striving consistently for constructive resolution, deep understanding, and healing, rather than actively seeding distortion, division, and destruction.

Example 03: The Cycle of Hypocritical Parenting: The Great Deception

I once met a European woman while living in India who expressed the firm, often-repeated view that life in developed, affluent countries is too easy and excessively comfortable, causing people to fail to genuinely understand many serious, fundamental dimensions of life. She contended that because children’s lives are artificially filled with great comfort, safety, and security, the basis for children to become "unhappy" is often incredibly trivial: not receiving breakfast the exact moment they desired, or not getting a toy of a specific, preferred color, even if they already possess the exact same toy in a slightly different colour. She noted numerous such examples, observing how parents become frightened, panicked, or traumatised by these tiny discomforts in their children, with many kids and parents reaching states of genuine trauma over these trivial matters.

The woman expressed her profound conviction that when she eventually became a mother, she would never raise her child in the same, coddling manner. I was deeply impressed by her conviction and genuinely believed that she would indeed raise her child dramatically differently. Following a span of a few years, this woman became a mother, and we met again. It was astonishing and heartbreaking to witness that this woman, who had previously and eloquently criticised a certain parenting style, was now employing the exact same, comfort-focused style to raise her own child. The profound irony lies in the fact that she was completely and psychologically unaware of her own profound, blinding hypocritical behaviour. The disparity between talking literally, merely showing off intellectual superiority, or following values superficially, versus following those values truly with honesty, sincerity, and seriousness, is so immense that it can be likened to the absolute contrast between the ground beneath our feet and the boundless sky above.

Example 04: The Hypocrisy of Breastfeeding Advice: The WHO Double Standard

Woman "A" used to severely and publicly criticise woman "B," routinely deeming her stupid, inferior, and psychologically damaging simply because woman "B" chose to breastfeed her child even after the child reached two full years of age. Woman "A" frequently cited the authoritative recommendations of the World Health Organisation (WHO) and the cultural practices of developed countries, advising vehemently against breastfeeding children for more than a maximum duration of one year. It is deeply ironic that the woman who was so quick to criticise and judge eventually became a mother herself and breast-fed her child until they were significantly over three years old, perfectly embodying the very practice she had condemned.

Example 05: The Double Standard of Toilet Training: Comfort and Dependency

There was a woman who used to aggressively criticise other mothers, deeming them stupid, rude, and lazy, simply because they chose to clean their children's bottoms after they pooped until the child reached the age of three or four years old. However, once this woman became a mother herself, she instilled the exact same habit in her own child, and continued the task of cleaning their bum until the child reached the age of approximately ten years old, prioritising her own comfort and the child's learned dependency over age-appropriate development and hygiene training.

1.4 Can values be transmitted to our children if we engage in pretence, hypocrisy, discrimination, and distorted psychology?

Consider an individual whose fundamental mindset is pathologically self-centric, deeply discriminatory, intensely hypocritical, and arrogantly superior. In a deliberate effort to meticulously maintain the superficial appearance of being rational, balanced, and morally righteous, he has cultivated a deeply ingrained, almost reflexive habit of consistently fabricating lies and elaborate cover stories. Due to his profoundly flawed and unconsciously abusive parenting skills, this person's child has been gradually and demonstrably becoming more irritable, exhibiting a marked decrease in patience, tolerance, and emotional regulation compared to their previous behaviour. If this person were to engage in a genuine and sincere search for the underlying, root psychological reasons, he would be instantly compelled to engage in uncomfortable self-introspection and acknowledge his own profound, active shortcomings as a parent and a human being.

However, to successfully avoid the pain of self-introspection and the painful, ego-shattering acknowledgment of his flaws, instead of sincerely seeking the true causes, he chooses the psychological path of least resistance: to attribute responsibility for all of these complex issues exclusively to others (the school, the environment, other children). This person then mechanically teaches his child to practice simplistic breathing exercises—to breathe in and exhale deeply. His unverified, superficial belief is that by engaging in the simple, mechanical, rote action of breathing in and out, one can automatically and effectively address and correct any complex negative traits in their personality or behaviour. If this person were to display even an ounce of sincerity and personal integrity, he might gain a crucial, honest insight into his genuine character. He could easily observe that he has been repeatedly inhaling and exhaling daily for many, many years. Yet, by merely doing this, has he been able to achieve genuine positive conditioning and true personality transformation in himself? Through the diligent practice of studying books written by like-minded authors in the field of psychology—which merely reinforce his existing biases and self-perception—this person has cultivated a superficial, jargon-filled understanding and now confidently regards himself as an unqualified "expert" in the subject, despite all evidence to the contrary.

Related article:

The heinous child-abuses caused by mindsets of Discrimination/Racism/Controlling vs Parenting