Steve,
A few months ago, I brought up Heraclitus in a conversation with my son, who's really into playing video games. When he inquired who Heraclitus was, I told him that Heraclitus would have told him, "You never play the same video game twice!" In retrospect, I assume my son is a Formist, since he disagreed with that statement!
---
Steve: "What I am trying to do...is explore the tension between formism and contextualism as it applies to the question of stability."
Any thoughts on the tension between mechanism and contextualism? I would assume that there would be even greater tension there, since mechanism is analytic and integrative, while contextualism is synthetic and dispersive. (At least formism and contextualism are both dispersive.)
---
From the "Contextualism" document (page 6):
"Still, even if there is a sense in which our theories must somehow conform to the texture and quality of the world, the contextualist remains free to ask: 'how can you be so sure that nature is not intrinsically changing and full of novelties?' (p. 279). In other words, even if our theories must conform to the world, we cannot escape the question: conform to what?"
So would a contextualist posit something analogous to a Kantian-style "Copernican Revolution" where it is the world that must conform to our theories?
~ Jason B On Monday, January 29, 2018, 2:13:30 PM EST, Steven Quackenbush <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Jason: Yes, I think Heraclitus is a wonderful example of a contextualist (even if all that survives from his writing are a few random aphorism). I find it interesting that Nietzsche -- who associates himself with "the radical repudiation of the very concept of being"-- feels "warmer and better than anywhere else" in the presence of Heraclitus [Ecce Homo; BT, Section 3].
Darcia and Jeffery: I completely agree. My own sympathies lie in the direction of the synthetic theories [especially organicism]. What I am trying to do in this episode [and in the deleted scene] is explore the tension between formism and contextualism as it applies to the question of stability. I'm going to offer here a few bullet points, in the hopes of further clarifying my thinking:
- Contextualists do not deny stability, even as they recognize that change is always possible. Substantive personality change may indeed be a long struggle. It may take years (not weeks) to see the fruits of this struggle.
- In previous posts, I suggested that transcendent formism is the default metaphysics of the modal research psychologist. Of course, any given theory may be a confusing pastiche of metaphysical systems. So, when I speak of formism as a default metaphysics, I am suggesting that the "rules of the game" articulated in research methods texts are essentially formist. For instance, the unqualified demand for reliability fosters a belief that transcontextual essences (e.g., traits) are somehow more real than are the less consistent (contextualized) strands of personality.
- From a contextualist point of view, even so-called transcontextual traits can be reinterpreted as context-contingent dynamics. This means that even the most hardened trait can change. However, meaningful change may require that we relax some of our formist assumptions, including the unqualified demand for reliability.
- If I am engaged in the long and difficult struggle to transform my essence, I may need to abandon the assumption that my core personality consists of precisely those qualities that are "locked in place" for the next three weeks. Of course, short-term stability is always an empirical possibility -- perhaps even a likelihood. But the contextualist need not embrace such stability as an epistemic demand.
- Significantly, our power to change (for the better) may depend on our metaphysics. So, the present exploration of Stephen Pepper's World Hypotheses is not merely academic. At some point, we will need to take a stand with respect to which metaphysics [or which "rule book"] we should embrace as our own.
~ Steve Q.
On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 12:33 PM, Darcia Narvaez <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Gregg, and that brings up another realm of discussion--epigenetics. If we look at Harlow's mistreated monkeys (lacking maternal touch), they were all stress-reactive in similar ways (for which we have neuroscientific explanations now--suboptimally developed HPA, vagal tone, endocrine systems, neurotransmitter systems) from lack of evolved maternal care. Humans are even more epigenetically shaped than any other animal, including temperament which is shaped by gestational experience, birth experience and caregiver treatment in the first days, weeks and months (temperament is typically measured first at 4 months of age--LOTS has happened before that). Plus there's epigenetic inheritance from the experience of parents and grandparents. So what is called "psychological traits" are by and large intergenerationally shaped, experienced-based outcomes, including the wide range of psychopathologies (off the the optimal trajectory of human development when properly supported) that are common today.
Darcia
On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 12:22 PM, Henriques, Gregg - henriqgx <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
This opens up a whole separate line of inquiry regarding the viability of traits. As such, I will offer just a few points.
Unlike Costa and McCrae and a few others, I am NOT a trait essentialist. However, the idea of traits as temperament, a predisposition to respond a certain way to certain situations clearly has some validity.
For example, trait neuroticism is, to me, a crucial concept.Here is a blog on how I think about. People differ in terms of the sensitivity of the negative affect system. Folks high in TN are more sensitive to being stressed, experience negative affect more intensely and are harder to calm down. Of course, that is not to say that folks can’t change or that what you do doesn’t matter.
But there is a wide variety of differences in the negative emotional reactions to situations and the construct of trait has value in that.
Best,
Gregg
From: tree of knowledge system discussion [mailto:TOK-SOCIETY-L@listserv .jmu.edu]On Behalf Of Jeffery Smith MD
Sent: Monday, January 29, 2018 9:46 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Stephen Pepper's "World Hypotheses"
I strongly support Darcia's point of view. I think that we use a person's name as a hook on which to hang the illusion of consistency across situations and across time. Neither is accurate. One clinical observation is how anxiety problems sometimes resolve over decades. We don't observe that because we assume that any important changes will take place in 12 sessions, or some brief time.In another example, I'm working with a person who was ritualistically abused, but is now 60 and has done a lot of work. Her issues are not mostly those of abuse, but the ordinary problems of growing and adapting to life.
Jeffery Smith
On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 9:35 AM, Darcia Narvaez <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Thanks, Steve!
The critiques of contextualism seem weak to me. They don't take into account developmental differences and changes through the lifespan (where some characteristics may be consistent for a time and then shift as the dynamism of development continues).
Further, the implicit assumption of the critique assumes that one can measure meaningful consistencies across time--sure but they are veneers of the dynamism of being a human being (unless a person has been toxically stressed/traumatized and oppressed into being robotic and rigid). Lots of information is lost in trying to categorize things one way or another.
Social cognitive theory of personality offers at least a remedy to thinking about personality consistency: rather than a trait carried situation to situation (as trait theory tends to assume), there is a consistent personality signature in a person by context variability across situations (e.g., extrovert with family, introvert at work).
But a virtuous person responds to each situation appropriately (e.g., with compassion and egolessness). Each situation is different so behavior is different each time. Holistic virtue cannot be measured in a controlled manner, since every situation is different and requires different skills/responses appropriate at that moment.
Darcia
On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 9:03 AM, nysa71 <000000c289d6ba14-dmarc-reques [log in to unmask]> wrote:
So would Heraclitus be an example of a Contextualist considering quotes like:
"You could not step twice into the same river."
"Everything changes and nothing stands still."
"All entities move and nothing remains still."
?
~ Jason Bessey
On Sunday, January 28, 2018, 10:28:02 PM EST, Steven Quackenbush <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Hello ToK Community,
Attached is the penultimate episode ofStephen Pepper's World Hypotheses.
Included as a special bonus feature is an optional "deleted scene"!
~ Steve Q.
############################
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to:mailto:TOK-SOCIETY-L-SIGNOFF-R [log in to unmask] or click the following link:http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bi n/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
############################
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:TOK-SOCIETY-L-SIGNOFF-R [log in to unmask] or click the following link:http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bi n/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~
Darcia Narvaez (DAR-sha narv-EYES)
Professor of Psychology, 118 Haggar Hall, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame IN 46556 [log in to unmask], 574-631-7835
My University Website
Also see DarciaNarvaez.com
Blog at Psychology Today: Moral Landscapes
Former Editor, Journal of Moral EducationInterviews and Podcasts BOOKS:
Embodied Morality: Protectionism, Engagement and Imagination (Palgrave-Macmillan)
Neurobiology and the Development of Human Morality: Evolution, Culture and Wisdom (Norton; discount: NARVAEZ)
Evolution, Early Experience and Human Development (OUP)
Ancestral Landscapes in Human Evolution (OUP)
Young Child Flourishing: Evolution, Family & Society (OUP)amazon.com/author/darcianarvae zSelf, Motivation and Virtue Project CONFERENCE VIDEOS: Sustainable Wisdom: Integrating Indigenous Knowhow for Global Flourishing Families for Conscious Living
############################
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:TOK-SOCIETY-L-SIGNOFF-R [log in to unmask] or click the following link:http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bi n/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
############################
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:TOK-SOCIETY-L-SIGNOFF-R [log in to unmask] or click the following link:http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bi n/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
############################
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list:write to: mailto:TOK-SOCIETY-L-SIGNOFF-R [log in to unmask] click the following link:http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bi n/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~
Darcia Narvaez (DAR-sha narv-EYES)
Professor of Psychology, 118 Haggar Hall, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame IN 46556 [log in to unmask], 574-631-7835
My University Website
Also see DarciaNarvaez.com
Blog at Psychology Today: Moral Landscapes
Former Editor, Journal of Moral Education
Interviews and Podcasts BOOKS:
Embodied Morality: Protectionism, Engagement and Imagination (Palgrave-Macmillan)
Neurobiology and the Development of Human Morality: Evolution, Culture and Wisdom (Norton; discount: NARVAEZ)
Evolution, Early Experience and Human Development (OUP)
Ancestral Landscapes in Human Evolution (OUP)
Young Child Flourishing: Evolution, Family & Society (OUP)
amazon.com/author/ darcianarvaez
Self, Motivation and Virtue Project
CONFERENCE VIDEOS: Sustainable Wisdom: Integrating Indigenous Knowhow for Global Flourishing
Families for Conscious Living
############################
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list:write to: mailto:TOK-SOCIETY-L-SIGNOFF- [log in to unmask] 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] 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
|
