Talk:Moron (psychology)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Moron (psychology) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Psychology Low‑importance

	Psychology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Disability

Moron (psychology) is within the scope of WikiProject Disability. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.DisabilityWikipedia:WikiProject DisabilityTemplate:WikiProject DisabilityDisability articles

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 16 January 2019 and 1 May 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Brycelog, Jjthakid23.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 04:28, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

German use

In his later years, Goddard recanted all his previous writings, but they had already been translated and published, including in German. They were a heavy inspiration for the Nazis who sent people deemed "morons" to the gas chambers first

This is nonsense. There is no term "moron" in German. The Nazis called such people "Schwachsinnige".--84.57.229.233 17:00, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The comment is sourced. Watch the documentary, which can be viewed at http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5524186889927580412, and if you feel that the comment is not supported by it, then by all means delete it again. I haven't got time to watch it now. SilentC 22:12, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK it's a slow day at work. The comment is supported by the documentary. The relevant part can be found at 24 minutes 30 seconds:

"Although he later recanted his theories, Goddard's books were translated into German where they inspired, among others, the Nazis. Morons were some of the first Germans sent to the gas chambers."

I will edit it slightly to more accurately reflect what was said. SilentC 22:54, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's really nonsense, documentary or no documentary, to state that the Nazis sent 'morons' to the gas chambers because of Goddard's 'translated books'. Goddard was an early eugenics theorist; he wanted (before the 1920's) the mentally disabled in institutions, and sterilized. The Nazis perverted eugenics theories to support their ideas of removal of the unwanted. They used general, widespread ideas about eugenics, they didn't need Goddard's book. For only one book by Goddard has been translated in German, Die Familie Kallikak. See: Karlsruhe Virtual Catalogue (always a useful site to check for German publications). It was an insignificant paper in 1914, reprinted in 1934. Maybe it influenced some people. You may check contemporary German books about racial theories for this. But without Goddard, the Nazis would have had exactly the same ideas. Soczyczi 12:06, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Submoron

I believe that submoron is also a technical term used to describe those below moron. Can anyone cite this? WilliamKF 19:17, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Controversial" NOW or back then?

The article implies that the word 'moron' in psychology was controversial from the beginning, despite how it also says that it was made-up for use in psychological jargon, which sounds somewhat contradictory. Restate the article to more clearly identify WHEN it was controversial rather than just saying that it is, without a time reference. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.165.170.43 (talk) 04:32, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

~Well, one very well say the word 'retarded' has become just about as common of an insult these past several generation. These psychoanalysts may attempt to come up with more and more politically correct terms to describe conditions, but ultimately, the pedestrian crowd will with time comfortably adapt these newer terms into informal insults as awareness of this new label for the same condition becomes prevalent. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.116.143.82 (talk) 01:03, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

request for restrictions

This article falls victim to vandalism far too often, I would like to request that this article has restricted access imposed upon it. Owen214 (talk) 10:59, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article is being watched my many editors and admins. Vandalism is quickly reverted and it is currently low. No need to establish protection at this time. -- Alexf^(talk) 11:56, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Term 'Moron'

The term 'moron' was being used by physicians at the Royal Edinburgh Asylum in the early 1880s. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.14.7.133 (talk) 17:10, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Then what does it mean then? SCRATCH1234 (talk) 09:50, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This whole article could use some working. There is not much at all information wise. Maybe you could talk more into the history and how it is still relevant in today's society. Rmorrell18 (talk) 22:17, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I would recommend to put the word in more relative term rather than something used to call someone. In the article it refers to words like idiotic and stupid that reference to the word moron and I do not think that is fair to be used that way. Talk about a proper usage for the term. ChandlerBoyd42 (talk) 21:54, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the feedback, I will take it into consideration when forming our final editsBrycelog (talk) 03:22, 22 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Un-encyclopedic, non-NPOV content

Referring to the edit from April 11, which added the following: "Moron" and other words like it — such as "idiot" — were used to support racists, classist ideas and to advance white supremacy behind the mask of scientific advancement.

An opinion piece from Teen Vogue is not a valid source by any stretch, especially when it's a thinly-veiled, agenda-pushing one with all-caps hysterics in its title. Does not belong here.
The bare minimum would be to clarify that it is an opinion, instead of presenting it as a fact (e.g. "Some argue that [...]"). But even there, it had better be a worthwhile scholarly source, which this one is very far away from. Funny that this type of thing happens in a semi-protected article. Vileyn0id (talk) 18:24, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I removed that text. Teen Vogue is not a reliable source, much less an opinion piece from them. As presented, it is very POV. Jip Orlando (talk) 20:13, 26 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]