Hi Nancy,
Thanks so much for your note. It was great having you here. You offer an interesting and helpful question regarding "building knowledge within the ToK System." This is a little hard to answer because I think there are many different communities that I am trying to address and the emphasis, tone and tenor varies a bit depending on the audience. For example, I am trying to connect with Big Picture philosophies and movements like Big History, I am also trying to get my vision out to mental health practitioners, and am trying to narrate the need for the system to lay people.
For the purposes of what follows, let me focus on how I am approaching the field of scientific/academic psychology (as separate from professional practitioners, which I am approaching from a different angle). I am attaching a presentation I gave at the last Theoretical and Philosophical conference as part of a President's initiative on Re-envisioning Psychology. It invites psychologists to consider moving from Empirical Psychology to a Metaphysical Empirical Psychology.
First, I attempt to point out in what I hope is a systematic and clear way, that the field's concepts and categories matter every bit as much as empirical data. Metaphysics in this context refers to the concepts and categories we use to carve up reality.
Second, I point out that the concepts and categories in current usage are obviously flawed. I show very clearly that we do not have good working definitions or shared conceptual maps of the field's central terms such as: psychology, behavior, mind, or human consciousness (and the animal/person relation).
Third, I point out that we have been pre-paradigmatic as a science since our inception. This relates to the problem of the definition of psychology because we have not had a system that has allowed a clear enough map of the field of inquiry. Together, points 2 & 3 document THE PROBLEM OF PSYCHOLOGY, which I argue no psychologist can ignore in good faith.
Fourth, because mainstream academic psychology has doubled down on empirical methods and data collection we are looking in the wrong direction; more rigorous empirical studies will not solve conceptual problems.
If you agree with these elements, you agree that there is a problem of psychology, then it follows deductively that we need to deeply consider a new conceptual and meta-theoretical approach to the field.
Then I offer the ToK System as a system that can solve both the metaphysical and metatheoretical issues that the field faces. And I argue it does these things far better than any other system, thus we should take it seriously. Indeed, if we are to be psychologists of good faith, we are compelled to take it seriously or advocate for a better conceptual system that can situate what we mean by the "field of psychology."
The problem I face is in the diagnosis of the problems above. That is, in response to the problem of psychology, mainstream psychology has adopted an "eclectic empiricism" as the modern paradigm. Thus, most psychologists have no idea how to think about or assess a metaphysical/meta-theoretical solution. As such, academics in the field look at my work, are overwhelmed, don't see "methods and data," and then look the other way. After all, it is complicated to learn and is not affirming of the direction the field is headed in. So, the natural response is to ignore the proposal, which is more or less what happened.
In sum, I do not consider my arguments intuitions. I have no problem about intuitions (I have had many intuitions that have led me to this), but this is every bit as much about clear argumentation as empirical research on cognitive dissonance (or anything else). It is very clear and logical and systematic. It is just is a different aspect of the scientific enterprise than most academic psychologists are trained in, and thus there is enormous inertia that must be overcome to get the field to pay attention.
So, I guess the challenge has been, which I have not solved, is how do you get academic psychologists to wake up to the problem of psychology and realize they need to take it seriously? I have not been able to find an effective way of communicating that message so that it gains traction with large numbers of folks, but that is how I see my journey, at least within that audience.
Best,
Gregg
From: tree of knowledge system discussion <[log in to unmask]> On Behalf Of Nancy Link
Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2018 10:29 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Thanks to all who made the conference a success
Dear Gregg,
I returned feeling upbeat and very stimulated intellectually. It was good to get out of the confines of my Toronto home office and experience the welcoming warmth of you, the other ToKers and the whole JMU community. THANK YOU!!!
One thing I have been wondering about is how you envision building knowledge within your ToK system? I think that we have strong negative reactions to scientific thought as it is currently practiced, but we may have different ways of reacting to that negative feeling. My feeling is that scientific thought has taken over too much of the dialogue. Experts use the "data shows that..."argument to silence opposition. The truth is that the data seldom show anything with absolute clarity. It is not surprising that ordinary people have given up on science and stopped listening. My solution to this problem is to try to contain science by putting it in balance with a narrative. I believe that the narrative (theory) can only be built using data. Once we have a narrative, we can use new data to refine or change the it, but without a narrative, we are at sea.
My impression of your negative reaction to the same reality is to blast through it with your strong and good intuitions about how things fit together. I like and trust your intuitions, but how do you argue to the outside world that your intuitions are better that theirs?
Nancy
From: tree of knowledge system discussion <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> on behalf of Gregg Henriques <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
Reply-To: tree of knowledge system discussion <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
Date: Monday, April 16, 2018 at 10:30 AM
To: "[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>" <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
Subject: Thanks to all who made the conference a success
Dear TOK Society,
I am writing to offer deep gratitude to all those who came and participated in the first ever TOK Society conference over the weekend. I thought the talks were splendid. The breadth of ideas covered was huge and yet they did seem to cohere around key themes and pointed to future directions for education, psychology and society at large. I also found the conversation on the back half of Friday to be very stimulating and demonstrated how thinking about big TOKs could illuminate powerful perspectives on real world issues.
I will be in consultation with folks about next steps. One thing I would like to consider is having folks share their powerpoints on the list and perhaps have some time devoted to reviewing the talks and engaging in some exchange about them on this list.
Thanks again to everyone.
Best,
Gregg
___________________________________________
Gregg Henriques, Ph.D.
Professor
Department of Graduate Psychology
216 Johnston Hall
MSC 7401
James Madison University
Harrisonburg, VA 22807
(540) 568-7857 (phone)
(540) 568-4747 (fax)
Be that which enhances dignity and well-being with integrity.
Check out my Theory of Knowledge blog at Psychology Today at:
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/theory-knowledge<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.psychologytoday.com_blog_theory-2Dknowledge&d=DwMF-g&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=Juk60hGu1CZhdxRJtBM7WIs6w_5lt2vuWHMjngCjLqY&s=RmWJ8gbPqrT25c6lk_wlXp7aiI0wwyVvlnjeGNCtY_I&e=>
############################
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:mailto:[log in to unmask]> or click the following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
############################
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:mailto:[log in to unmask]> or click the following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
############################
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list:
write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]
or click the following link:
http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
|
