Yeah, I thought it might be something like that. It’s of course fine for psychology, or any other discipline, to use terms in ways that are similar to but not quite the same as everyday language, and I’d agree the jargon thus established can give us useful ways to think about their subject matter. But however “basic level” that knowledge is within that academic context, it doesn’t necessarily translate to discussion elsewhere. And yes, I am well aware that sentimentality being considered bad is not new.
My apologies, though, that you felt I misrepresented your position by poor editing. I’m embarrassed to admit that I think I just clipped the parts of what you and Seraphael said that put my back up. I will seek to establish zen-like calm and not get annoyed by what I’ve interpreted as unnecessarily snippy and patronising posts on the forum. It is, after all, counterproductive and also hypocritical of me to contribute yet more of them.
So shutting up now, and my apologies to you and all other readers for fanning the flames.
