This is from another list I am on and thought it might interest some of you out there. Jeff Nagelbush Ferris State University
>From: "Jeffrey Nagelbush" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Fwd: Paper on Theoretical Unification of Psychology >Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2002 15:12:18 -0400 > > > > >>From: "Gregg Henriques" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >>Date: Sat, 27 Apr 2002 11:17:31 EDT >> >> Along the lines of the tangled bank of psychology thread, readers of >>this >>list might be interested to know that a paper on the theoretical >>unification >>of psychology will be coming out as the lead article in the December 2002 >>issue of the APA Journal, Review of General Psychology. >> >> The paper introduces a new epistemological system, called the Tree of >>Knowledge System. The ToK System provides a visuo-spatial representation >>that >>aligns four broad classes of science (physical, biological, psychological >>and >>social), four dimensions of complexity (Matter, Life, Mind & Culture), >>four >>classes of objects (Inanimate, Animate, Animal, & Human) and four levels >>of >>computation (Quantum, Genetic, Neuronal, Symbolic) on the dimension of >>time, >>from Big Bang to the Present. >> >> This new epistemological system sets the stage for framing the relevant >>issues and untangling the buzzing, confusing mass of information that >>currently constitutes psychological theory. In particular, the success of >>the >>Modern Synthesis as the unifying theory of biology is used as a framework >>for >>understanding that which theoretically differentiates psychology from >>biology >>from below and psychology from the social sciences from above. An extended >>abstract and conclusion are offered below and I would be happy to send >>list >>members preprints if they would like. >> >>Best regards, >>Gregg Henriques, Ph.D. >>Research Assistant Professor of Psychology >>Department of Psychiatry >>University of Pennsylvania >> >>The Tree of Knowledge System and the Theoretical Unification of Psychology >> >>We have a surfeit of facts. What we do not have, and most of us in the >>quiet >>of our nights know it, is an overarching conception of context in which we >>can put these facts and, having done so, the truth stands a chance of >>emerging. -S. B. Sarason (1989, p. 279). >> >>Abstract >>There currently is no unified theory of psychology. Instead, psychology >>consists of a complex set of mini-theories that are overlapping and >>contradictory in various ways. This fragmentation of knowledge hurts the >>field and plays a central role in the difficulty psychological science has >>in >>generating cumulative knowledge. The outline of a unified framework is >>offered in which the focus is placed on the integration and synthesis of >>ideas. A broad conception of the evolution of complexity and the >>fundamental >>divisions in science is used to provide a unique vantage point from which >>to >>examine how psychological science exists in relationship to the other >>sciences. This new view is used to argue that psychology can be thought of >>as >>existing between the central insights of B. F. Skinner and Sigmund Freud. >>Specifically, it is argued that Skinner's fundamental insight, when >>combined >>with cognitive neuroscience, provides the framework for understanding how >>mind emerged out of life and that Freud's fundamental insight, when >>anchored >>to a coherent model of the nonverbal mind, provides the framework for >>understanding the evolutionary changes in mind that gave rise to human >>culture. By linking mind to life from the bottom and linking mind to >>culture >>from the top, psychology is effectively boxed in between biology and the >>social sciences. It is concluded that such a synthesis has large >>implications >>for bridging the current gulf between the natural and social sciences. >> >>Conclusion: Toward a Unified Theory of Psychology >> A well-defined subject matter, a shared language, and conceptual >>agreements >>about the fundamentals are key elements that constitute a mature science. >>The >>physical and biological sciences have reached maturity. The psychological >>sciences have not. Instead, students of psychology are given choices to be >>or >>not to be radical behaviorists, cognitive psychologists, evolutionary >>psychologists, social constructivists, feminists, humanists, physiological >>psychologists, or psychodynamic psychologists, among others. The lack of a >>shared, general understanding has had unfortunate consequences. Paradigms >>are >>defined against one another and epistemological differences justify the >>dismissal of insights gleaned from other approaches. The result has been a >>fragmented field and a gulf between the natural and social sciences. >> This analysis demonstrates that the fragmentation that currently >>characterizes the field of psychology is unnecessary. Instead, by >>utilizing >>the ToK System as a meta-theoretical framework, a coherent unified theory >>of >>psychology that effectively incorporates the key insights from the major >>domains of thought is possible. In the end, it can only be through the >>process of convergence and the development of a shared conceptual >>framework >>that we will be able to generate an overarching conception of context in >>which the truth stands a genuine chance of emerging. >> >>Sarason, S. B. (1989). The lack of an overarching conception in >>psychology. >>Journal of Mind & Behavior, 10, 263-279. > > > _________________________________________________________________ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
