Talk:John Gray (U.S. author)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material of any kind that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. [FAQ]

This article is part of WikiProject Texas, a WikiProject related to the U.S. state of Texas.

Removed some apparent copyvio (compare here).

Contents 1 Requested move 1.1 Discussion 2 Crummy article 3 Birth 4 Name on Identification Card 5 CPU Accreditation 6 Columbia Pacific University (CPU): A Victim of Miscarriage of Justice and Sensationalist Media 7 Gray's PhD: Who Cares?

[edit] Requested move

John Gray (Men Are from Mars, Women Are from Venus) → John Gray (U.S. author) Much better title. --Hottentot

---

Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~

• Support. A much simpler name. – AxSkov (☏) 06:05, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
• Support. Even if another JG exists who is a US author, I think this one's well enough known to be the primary "John Gray (U.S. author)". --Calair 23:48, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
• Support. Jonathunder 02:36, 2005 September 10 (UTC)

This article has been renamed after the result of a move request. Dragons flight 07:31, September 10, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion

Add any additional comments

There's nothing here about him but criticism. I mean it's nice to know that his Ph.D. has come under fire and that despite dispensing relationship advice he got divorced, but that doesn't tell us much about the person.

It's like the mass of negative information about Monty Roberts. I'm tempted to cut and paste the bulk of this article onto the talk page and leave a stub. Uncle Ed 17:50, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

This article is a silly ad hominem attack. Gray's books may or may not be pop-psychology bunk, but this stuff about his marital history and professional credentials is almost irrelevant. Only two sentences summarizing his work?

I'm not convinced the marital stuff is relevant, but his professional credentials certainly are. Gray is in the business of dispensing psychological advice, and in the course of that business he has repeatedly chosen to stand on his doctorate. His website offers "relationship advice from Dr John Gray". His books credit him as "John Gray, Ph.D". In an ideal world, maybe he would be judged solely on the quality of his ideas; in the real world, many people are more willing to believe an idea when it comes from somebody with a professional qualification. --Calair 23:13, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

• The Dilbert comicstrip had a joke about a guy who would start a TV show and call himself a doctor - albeit he was not - because then he could call people stupid and they would thank him for it. Patchouli 02:18, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Crummy article

The John Gray page is long on critical REMARKS but short on substance. It says hardly anything about his teachings - other than "men differ from women". And the criticism is, "That's a simplistic stereotype." --Uncle Ed 14:59, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

There's some more information about his teachings at Men Are from Mars, Women Are from Venus - it's not particularly well-written, but it certainly has more detail about Gray's ideas than this article does. Likewise, it expands on the criticisms of those ideas.

Duplicating that discussion doesn't seem like a useful thing to do, but what about merging the two pages? If he'd written a wide range of unrelated books it'd make sense to discuss each of them separately, but the ideas presented in 'Mars and Venus' are at the heart of just about everything Gray's done since; I think it makes more sense to discuss them here, as a body of work, than have an individual page for each book.

The criticism of his ideas belongs in the same place as discussion of those ideas, whether that's in the Mars & Venus article or here. Material about his qualifications should be in this article. --Calair 22:56, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

I vote to merge Mars & Venus into John Gray. This combined article could begin with his bio, the controversy over his degree, and then launch into his views and critical respons:

1. Gray's background
2. Gray and his PhD
3. Gray's psychological views about gender differences
4. Critical respones to Gray's views

Good outline? --Uncle Ed 01:51, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Works for me. --Calair 03:07, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Birth

In what year was John Gray born?Patchouli 02:14, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

The article says 1951. --Calair 05:27, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Name on Identification Card

This John Gray his pseudonym?Patchouli 22:04, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

• No, John Gray is his real name. He goes by Johnny Gray in real life, or that's what the family calls him. I met him at a family reunion a few years ago. One of our great aunts was at the time very old and had a lot of health issues (she has since passed away), and he got everyone's attention in the family so that he could do some kind of eastern magic on this aunt. This was in Sedona, where there are supposedly "lane lines" of energy coming together. He was wearing a very unattractive V-neck shirt which showed his chest hair at the time--I remember it distinctly. He has scraggly hair, and one of the Grays there, this guy with long black hair who was supposedly one of our cousins, lamented to my prepubescent sister that "there are so many hot girls here! Too bad I'm related to them all!" I hope someone found this useful or entertaining.

Nonetheless, some of his writing is ingeniously valid! Like the point system.

[edit] CPU Accreditation

CPU was never accredited. At one time it held California approval but was never accredited. I propose changing the parenthetical comment, (although it is not clear whether these degrees were ever accredited) to (approved in California by the CPPVE but always unaccredited). Bill Huffman 19:22, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Ok.--72.202.129.98 08:17, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Note that I reverted a recent change (by an anon) calling CPU a diploma. I contend that the term diploma mill evokes an pov that is not neutral and open to interpretation. For example, to many diploma mill indicates an illegal institution. Prior to 1997 CPU was not an illegal institution. Regards, Bill Huffman 05:47, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree, it's not encyclopaedic language and shouldn't be used unless in the context of a properly-attributed quote (as is done later in the article).

On the other hand, I don't think it's appropriate to include the PhD in the introduction without some acknowledgement that its worth is questionable - CPU was legal at the time but not accredited, and as the quote from Rubin shows it already had a bad name when Gray got his PhD. IMHO, better just to postpone the issue altogether until later in the article where it can be properly addressed. --Calair 12:14, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree. Nice edit. Thanks, Bill Huffman 20:05, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Columbia Pacific University (CPU): A Victim of Miscarriage of Justice and Sensationalist Media

Dirty Politics and Libelous Announcements

Irresponsible and libelous media announcements have defamed Columbia Pacific University (CPU) as a diploma mill. In reality CPU was supervised and approved by the California State Department of Education. Effective 1986-1989, California documents confirm that CPU's full institutional approval was the equivalent of regional accreditation [1], [2]. Thus, CPU was a California State Accredited University. CPU degrees are legal and valid! California newspapers, such as the Point Reyes Light and the Union Tribune in San Diego published misinforming articles about CPU but failed to set the record straight when I submitted to the editors letters requesting appropriate corrections.

The closing of CPU resulted not from valid educational considerations but from the dirty politics of higher education in California. Mind you, the judicial system is often not about truth and justice but about power and money. Miscarriage of justice is a common phenomenon. CPU was closed on the basis of a fabricated report full of factual errors and insubstantial allegations. For example, it absurdly claimed that Harvard-trained psychiatrist Dr. Richard Crews was unfit to serve as the President of CPU because he was an MD and not a PhD. Another preposterous and prejudiced assertion was directed against the black deans of CPU holding PhDs from well-known European universities. The deans in question were Dr. Ketsela, graduate of the University of Wales, and Dr. Tolossa, graduate of the University of Bremen, [3]. The report falsely alleged that these European universities are unaccredited. There were over 80 errors of fact in the report rendering it completely worthless.

Error of Fact Number 28: The Spanish Dissertation

Error of Fact Number 28, for example, has become quite famous and mentioned in a variety of media articles. It concerns a Spanish dissertation that allegedly was approved by faculty who did not speak Spanish. In reality, the CPU faculty mentor who supervised the dissertation worked with the student in Spanish and the doctoral thesis provided Table of Contents, Summary and additional information in English. Moreover, CPU policy changed in early 1995, so that dissertations could be submitted only in English. Documented refutation of all the false claims against CPU has been published on line in "The Chronicles of Columbia Pacific University", [4]. Please, note that CPU graduates earned their degrees through competency and hard work. Thousands of them teach at accredited schools or work in research, civil service, business and industry. The defamation of the good name of CPU as a pioneer of distance education is unfair and unacceptable. Today CPU is a federally recognized non-profit educational institution, [5].

Pluralistic Education is a Necessity

I believe that Pluralistic Education advances the Public Good and therefore it is not only a Democratic Right but also a Necessity. We live in the electronic age that can provide the technology for the development of an information society in which education becomes accessible to broad segments of humankind. The rise of cybernetic culture in the global village can bring distance learning even to the most remote areas of the world. It helps education to be more democratic. Knowledge is power. Education empowers people to become an integral part of a well-informed citizenry, enabling them to create a constructive culture of social and political democracy. Today virtual schools allow the realization of the once-utopic vision of education for all. Unfortunately, the development of virtual schools is also accompanied by the proliferation of Diploma Mills, bogus universities that are in the business of selling fake academic degrees. The infestation of the academic world with diploma mills is accompanied by the problem of how to separate the wheat from the chaff, the wide-spread inability of the public to differentiate between legitimate and illegitimate educational institutions. Authoritarian Measures Suffocate Creativity It was Albert Einstein who stressed that imagination is more important than knowledge and that the outstanding accomplishments of the intellect are based on the freedom of thought. In Ideas and Opinions (1954) he points out that the development of science and of the creative activities of the spirit require inner freedom, "the independence of thought from the restrictions of authoritarian and social prejudices as well as from unphilosophical routinizing and habit in general" (p. 42). And he adds: Schools might play constructive or destructive roles. They may favour inward freedom and encourage independent thought but they may also interfere and repress them through authoritarian measures. Another leading thinker, Nicholas Negroponte, Professor of Media Technology at MIT, maintains that bureaucratic organizations are the enemies of creative environments. In "Where Do New Ideas Come From?" (Wire, 4.01), he observes that governments and corporations are sterile leagues that stifle imagination and creativity. This is a pity, he says, because we need innovative schools to develop, foster and nurture new ideas for human progress. Prof. Negroponte views the university as an unsettled habitat with undefined edges accommodating academics as well as people "who don't fit traditional scholarship" because new ideas come from a muddled creative environment.

A CPU Connection

Allow me please to add a note about my affiliation with CPU. After graduating from high school in Hungary, I attended for two years the University of Szeged. I hold a BA and a Teacher's Certificate from the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, and a Master's (History and Art History) from Concordia University in Montreal ( Canada). I wrote my thesis on Georg Lukacs: Aesthetics and History. I completed all my doctoral course requirements at Concordia, did additional work at Columbia Pacific University and wrote my dissertation on The Interface Dynamics of Art and Science (1986). In the process of researching my doctoral thesis I collaborated with a group of renowned scientists and scholars, including P.R. Halmos (Editor of the American Mathematical Monthly), Sir Nevill Mott (Nobel Laureate in Physics) and John Kemeny (Dartmouth College President). Under the title, The Brush and the Compass, the dissertation was published in 1988 by University Press of America, an umbrella academic clearing house of Harvard, Columbia, Stanford and others. The book has been internationally acclaimed and also taught in anthropology, art and science and other interdisciplinary courses. I am also the author of A History of Architecture (Jerusalem: R. Mass, 1972), as well as of other critically acclaimed books, and have published numerous scholarly papers in such peer-reviewed journals as Leonardo, Orbiter, Ylem, Pulsar, Contemporary Philosophy, Q.A.M.T. and Lo Straniero.

Paul Hartal 04:19, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi Paul, I thank you for all the information on CPU. I have heard some of the details before but I find it personally interesting to learn more. There were/are a number of California approved schools that in my personal opinion should have been closed down rather than CPU. In my mind this whole sad story is indicative of the extra dangers that come with unaccredited schools. Thank you again, Bill Huffman 08:16, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi Bill,

I appreciate your response. Thank you.

Paul Hartal 02:31, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Gray's PhD: Who Cares?

Why is everyone so ticked that this man doesn't have a fancy enough Ph.D.? Even if the CPU doctorate is bogus, many best-selling authors only have B.A.s. Obviously, Gray is not an expert; that should be noted in the wiki article, as it is, voluminously!. However, despite his book's shoddy methodology, it did sell over a million copies, and has positively influenced lives. Shouldn't that be as noteworthy in the article as the potshots everyone's taking at his credibility? M. Frederick 03:31, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

I think that it would be a good idea to expand on the article in some of the ways that you suggest. The number of books that he sold would improve the article significantly, in my opinion. Positively influencing lives would also be good if you could find such a statment from a reliable source. I do think that his academic credentials are also relevant to the article. I agree with you though some positive balance would improve the article greatly. Bill Huffman 06:33, 23 February 2007 (UTC)