On Wed, 07 Sep 2011 14:44:13 -0700, Nancy Melucci wrote: >I think some of his points can be taken without buying the whole bill of >goods. >I too am disturbed by the ever growing number of life states and behaviors >that >are labelled mental illness. But there are many other (market, for example) >forces that are driving that trend. It's a little limited to lay that one at >the door of psychology alone. > >I think that such criticisms can be useful in our quest to make psychology >even >more rigorous.
A couple of points: (1) Some of his points may be valid but I would bet that they are valid *in spite* of his general viewpoint and attitude. (2) His lack of scholarship is evident in a lot of what he writes. Consider the following statements he makes: |About scientific evidence, philosopher John Stuart Mill said, “No amount of |observations of white swans can allow the inference that all swans are white, |but the observation of a single black swan is sufficient to refute that conclusion.” |This saying aptly summarizes the difference between scientific evidence and |every other kind of evidence, and it dramatizes the difference between science |and ordinary human thinking. | |This very strict evidentiary standard is essential for science to provide its riches, |and it is no problem for people who have been properly educated. But in the lives |of people for whom “evidence” means “he said, she said,” certain problems are |inevitable. The issue that Lutus is referring to is known as the "problem of induction", that is, how do we know that our observations of the world are valid and in some sense "true". See the following Wikipedia entry (yadda-yadda): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problem_of_induction David Hume is usually cited as the source of the black swan quote (Hume preceded JSM) though I cannot identify exactly the source. Nassim Nicolas Taleb, author of "Fooled by Randomness" and "The Black Swan" cites Hume as the source here: http://parallaxbrief.wordpress.com/2009/03/08/nicholas-taleb-david-hume-and-the-arrival-of-the-unimaginable/ For more info on who Taleb is, see the Wikipedia entry: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nassim_Taleb But this is a minor matter because, as important as Hume and Mill are in introducing the problem of induction, the more important figure is Karl Popper who tried to provide a solution to the problem with the criterion of falsifiability. Popper is the more relevant and important source to cite though, if one does reading in this area, the researchers and philosophers who do not believe that Popper provides a solution or the best solution. For one more up-to-date treatment, look at the Wikipedia entry for the "No free lunch in search and optimization" approach: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_free_lunch_in_search_and_optimization (3) Lutus make a number of statements that can be taken apart this way which raises questions about his competence to speak meaningfully on these topics. >He does confuse a lot of other things with psychology. His broad brush and >confused approach reveal his overall "cranky" nature. >That doesn't mean that some of what he says isn't worth considering. That may be true but I would suggest that there are better, more informed sources who probably make more thoughtful and reasoned arguments than Lutus. Last time I checked, clinical psychologists don't all go to the annual APA meeting, hold hands, and sing Kumbaya during the Division 12 social hour. Like other areas of psychology, there are clinical psychologists who conduct blood feuds with other clinical psychologists in a effort to promote a particular theory or point of view. The anti-pharmacotherapy types probably bring the smackdown to the pro-pharmacotherapy types while the traditional behavioral therapist types engage in a battle royale with the cognitive-behavioral therapists and the purely cognitive therapists. And don't be surprised if the psychoanalysts drop an elbow or two as they go around attacking all of the johnny come-lately therapists. In summary: there are much better sources and arguments to be made about the problems that Lutus refers to. It makes more sense to find them, read them, and use them as a basis for one's critique instead of Lutus' "position papers". -Mike Palij New York University [email protected] --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected]. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=12518 or send a blank email to leave-12518-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
