Login  Register

Re: The myth of knowledge

Posted by Eric Charles on Aug 20, 2011; 1:43pm
URL: http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/no-one-shall-expel-us-from-the-paradise-that-Cantor-has-created-Hugh-Woodin-s-ultimate-L-Richard-Elw8-tp6699752p6706320.html

Resend: I have not seen this post yet, apologies if it is a repeat.

Owen,
Alas, the first post was not a trailer (Nick has been haranguing me about this). Instead, the first post was an attempt to crudely connect my blog with the other blogs I have been actively commenting on for the past year or so (to try to get some instant gratification in terms of traffic and comments, and to acknowledge others' influence in the current endeavor). So, here it goes...

I struggled to pick a good title. "Fixing Psychology" seemed appropriate to the things I am likely to write about, and also a touch provocative... which I liked. For the past hundred years or so, psychology has been in a state like physics was shortly before Einstein - from the outside things look fine, but inside there are hosts of cracks in the system, and the patches aren't holding very well. As late as the 1970's you could still find water cooler conversation in psychology departments between people wondering what subfield the next "Newton" of psychology would come from - What type of theory would eventually emerge to unify the field? What type of person would create it? However, that hope has been almost totally abandoned and psychology continues to fragment. Also, as a result of that fragmentation some of the most scientifically 'solid' areas of psychological research (learning theory and perceptual research) have become very marginalized. The few things that presently serves as a 'foundation' for the field are not ideal. So in that sense, psychology needs fixing in two ways: 1) We need to work towards unity, rather than division. 2) We need a better foundation to build that unity on.

Many of my past and in-progress publications are along these lines, but I was hoping that a blog would provide a place to develop parts of more long-term projects, to test run new ideas, and to develop responses too long to be a 'comment' somewhere else. In particular, I am hoping to generate feedback and reactions while the works are still in progress, and to stimulate discussion more generally. Among the long term projects are: 1) A Perception-Action textbook I am trying to produce through massively multi-authored means through the International Society for Ecological Psychology. The book would have perception at its core, but connect to social psychology, cognitive psychology, and other areas commonly thought of in a disjointed fashion. 2) A book on "Natural Design" in which I am trying to tie 40 years worth of Nick's work into a coherent story showing the connection between evolutionary biology, behavior, and psychology. 3) The most long term, an Introductory Psychology textbook that presents psychology in a unified rather than fragmentary way. Also, on the "service" side of my job, I am  heading a taskforce for the 'Society of General Psychology' trying to find ways to support early career psychologists who are trying to pursue general interests against the pressures to narrowly specialize.

One thing not to under-emphasize, is that very few of the ideas I will be proffering are that new. There was a false-start towards a psychology influenced by American Pragmatism in the early 1900's. It remains the most coherent framework for a science of psychology, and so most of what I'll be promoting to "fix" psychology are other people's ideas that are a hundred years old. In some places I will be very explicit about that historic context, in other places I will just try to explain how things look from that point of view. Also, my desire to simply stimulate discussion should not be under-emphasized. If I could get any reasonable number of people to start thinking seriously about unifying psychology, I would be pretty happy, even if they didn't like my suggestions for how to do it.

Was that what you were looking for?

Eric


On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 11:20 PM, Owen Densmore <[hidden email]> wrote:

Whoa, how about more?  Why did you feel a need to start the blog?  What is your goal?  Why "psychology" or "fixing"? .. possibly Cognitive Science, or History of Science, or xx?


We need at least a trailer .. maybe the first post was it?

        -- Owen

On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 6:03 PM, ERIC P. CHARLES <epc2@...> wrote:
Shameless plug: I have started a academically-oriented blog. I suspect my most recent post, on '<a href="http://fixingpsychology.blogspot.com/" target="" onclick="window.open('http://fixingpsychology.blogspot.com/');return false;">The Myth of Knowledge', is relevant to many of the discussions that I have been part of on this list, and will be of interest to at least a few people here.

I now return you to your regularly scheduled posts (and second the point that the 'ultimate L' article was very cool).

Eric



============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at <a href="http://www.friam.org" target="" onclick="window.open('http://www.friam.org');return false;">http://www.friam.org

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Eric Charles

Professional Student and
Assistant Professor of Psychology
Penn State University
Altoona, PA 16601



============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org