Dear Waldemar, Thank you for your inquiry. Your question has helped me to clarify my own thinking. My question includes both components. Regarding building knowledge within the ToK system: The core problem is that psychology does not have a theory describing human functioning. As Gregg has so eloquently pointed out, this is a matter of serious concern. I think that Gregg’s ToK system makes important inroads into this problem, but from my perspective it offers a framework for understanding human functioning rather than a theory. For me, a theory describes in detail the linkages between concepts. For example, Gregg says that his Behavioral investment Theory is make up of 6 principles: 1) energy economics 2) evolution 3) genetics 4) neuro-computational control 5) learning and 6) development. I completely agree. But for me, a theory has to describe how these things meaningfully interconnect. In my opinion, Gregg’s ToK system lays the groundwork but does not do all interconnecting that needs to be done in order for a theory to emerge. Regarding how to “justify” this system to those who question the ToK validity: I think that Gregg’s ToK system was built with strong, science informed and experienced informed intuitions about how humans function. Knowledge-building begins with intuition. It then involves building a model and putting it out in the public domain and seeing if the ideas of others cohere. That is why I think that the difference between the terms “theory" and “ framework" are important. A “theory" activates justification of ones own position relative to others. A “framework" is more welcoming. It offers other ideas a place at the table. I don’t know if Gregg sees his system as a theory or a framework, and (I realize now) that I have some self-interest in asking the question. Sincerely, Nancy From: tree of knowledge system discussion <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> on behalf of "[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>" <[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: Friday, April 20, 2018 at 5:41 PM To: "[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>" <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> Subject: Re: Thanks to all who made the conference a success Nancy: May I ask a question about that which you are discussing with Gregg? In particular, I am interested in your query: One thing I have been wondering about is how you envision building knowledge within your ToK system? Are you asking about how the collection of knowledge in ToK is or is going to be organized? Or, are you asking about how a reply is (or replies are) going to be structured so as to provide answers or responses to those who question the ToK (ie: how do you argue to the outside world that your intuitions are better that theirs?)? Best regards, Waldemar Waldemar A Schmidt, PhD, MD (Perseveret et Percipiunt) 503.631.8044 Strive not to be a success, but rather to be of value. (A Einstein) On Apr 17, 2018, at 7:28 AM, Nancy Link <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote: 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://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.psychologytoday.com_blog_theory-2Dknowledge&d=DwIF-g&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=qkr33wSvBWf1wAdflubNAEbzGKiR1Yzy_NAuryrvMYw&s=5ezz06LCVFfkrJY3yxQoVkICU9Va0mWerIYR_dDbtCU&e=<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]<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