Hi TOK List,

 

  I hope everyone had a nice Thanksgiving Break. I am happy to report that a paper that I co-authored with Dr. Joe Michalski was just published in Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science on the concept of behavior and its implications for psychological science (attached). The summary view is that, from a ToK System point of view, natural science adopts a third person, exterior view of the world that is epistemologically and methodologically defined in terms of behavior, which is patterns of change in object/field relationships that can be measured/observed. The ToK also makes the ontological claim that behavioral patterns take place at four different planes of existence or dimensions of behavioral complexity (Matter, Life, Mind, and Culture) and three different levels of analysis (part, whole, group in field or systematic contexts…see the Periodic Table section).

 

  The argument of the paper is that this big picture view sets the stage for resolving one of scientific psychology’s core problems, namely the debate between the behaviorists and the cognitive functionalists. The argument is that the debate is ultimately resolved when we realize that there is a “mental order of nature” to use Cahoone’s conception or a dimension of mental behavioral complexity to use the ToK language system (i.e., the third dimension, Mind, which is above Life and below Culture). The conclusion is that basic psychological science can be defined as the science of mental behavior.

 

  I enjoyed working on this paper with Joe and I think the Periodic Table of Behavior is a nice complement to the overall ToK System. For example, I have been reading some of Ken Wilber’s work recently. I have always found his quadrants useful for understanding epistemological frames of knowing. My take is that the ToK System allows for a much clearer view of the upper right and lower right quadrants. That is the individual-object and developmental systems holistic views provided by scientific onto-epistemology. Moreover, it is a view of science that is much more congruent with the interior and moral concerns of the humanist, thus setting the stage for a better, more coherent consilient scientific humanistic philosophy.

 

Regards to all.

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