Hi Gregg and TOK List,

I like it.

Regarding Spirit, it can be individual and collective, such as the 
spirit of the American people, the spirit of the company etc. That does 
not mean that every American or every person in that company behave, 
think or feel the same, but that there is a mood, an energy or, well, a 
spirit that one becomes a part of if one truly joins the group--and it 
is a path into the group. The German word is Geist, which is what the 
German Idealists were exploring as part of Romanticism.

Best,

Lene


On 14-09-2019 14:57, Henriques, Gregg - henriqgx wrote:
>
> Hi TOK List,
>
>   I hope this finds you well. I am writing with a couple of updates 
> and reflections. First, I am happy to say that a paper that Joe 
> Michalski and I wrote was recently accepted for publication in the 
> journal of Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Sciences. It 
> provides the most thorough argument for understanding the concept of 
> “behavior” from a ToK lens and relating it to the science of 
> psychology. It also formally introduces the Periodic Table of 
> Behavior. This will be important to the larger Theory of Knowledge for 
> the 21^st Century vision because it continues to advance the argument 
> that the language game of science can be understood via the concept of 
> behavior. The paper argues that scientific epistemology is about the 
> methods of reliably observing and measuring “behavior”, defined as 
> changes in object-field relationships. This is one aspect of the 
> concept. Then there is the scientific ontology argument that there are 
> different kinds of behavior in nature. This is what the Tree of 
> Knowledge maps. On the left side, there is the ontic reality of the 
> behaviors of objects (Matter), organisms (Life), animals (Mind), and 
> people (Culture). And, on the right side, emerging out of human 
> Culture there are the scientific ontological models found in the 
> physical, biological, “psychological”, and human social sciences. 
> Psychological is in quotes here because it refers to how the ToK 
> characterizes “basic” psychology. A more apt general description of 
> the current category of science that corresponds to the animal-mental 
> dimension would be the broad “mind, brain, behavioral sciences”.
>
>   Some time in the not too distant future, I will build off of this 
> analysis and share Zak Stein’s conception of “metapsychology” and how 
> it corresponds to what I have meant by a consilient scientific 
> humanistic philosophy for the 21^st Century. I will be sharing how I 
> think the concepts of “Behavior, Spirit, and Morality” provide a way 
> to frame the issues and move toward a more holistic language system 
> that resolves the tensions between the scientific and humanistic 
> worldviews. “Behavior” refers to how the ToK System frames the 
> language game of science, “spirit” refers to each person’s unique, 
> idiographic phenomenological experience of being in the world from 
> their first person perspective, and “morality” refers to the 
> intersubjectively shared values that define the good relative to evil 
> (or however values are framed). Speaking of a Theory Of Knowledge for 
> the 21^st Century, I am exploring the possibility of developing a 
> YouTube Channel, TOK21. The description is attached. I would welcome 
> ideas, suggestions or feedback. I will be getting consultation with 
> some folks here at JMU for doing a YouTube channel. Any ideas folks 
> have would be great.
>
>   Finally, as I have been talking to more and more folks outside of 
> both psychology and the US, it has become increasingly clear to me 
> that it is essential to couch the Tree of Knowledge/UTUA Framework in 
> its socio-historical context. By that, I mean that the scheme was 
> definitely born in an 
> American/Clinical/Psychological/Empirical/Science context. That is, it 
> really is a response to the intersection of these ideas and the fact 
> that there is a deep and profound problem of incoherence in the 
> “center” of them. Last night, I arranged it into the acronym “SPACE” 
> (as Andee says, I do love my acronyms). This concept can then be used 
> to describe the SPACE (i.e., the specific institutional, 
> socio-historical justification context) that the system arose in 
> response to. I say this because its form is very much influenced by 
> that context. For the record, I do not mean to imply that it is only 
> valid in this cultural context. Rather, only that it is important to 
> contextual the forces that gave rise to it to understand its full form 
> and function.
>
> Hope folks have a good weekend.
>
> 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://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.psychologytoday.com_blog_theory-2Dknowledge&d=DwID-g&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=uTewe5jj_xC4cXKVBlH3ook3PiuZMuSO-iZBDd7l-Y0&s=955iPRZqaTYOCRoW8gq_qNSo_WBSbzIZuTxiFLwnf0k&e=
>
> Check out my webpage at:
>
> www.gregghenriques.com <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.gregghenriques.com&d=DwID-g&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=uTewe5jj_xC4cXKVBlH3ook3PiuZMuSO-iZBDd7l-Y0&s=-ngBQE--zSexKU_hP7CtSHTMVD_kDZgIx3dB1tOwxFE&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]
or click the following link:
http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1