Hi all,

Thank you, Gregg, for sharing these materials. I found the summary video
very helpful and insightful. You did an excellent job of clearly presenting
several complex ideas in a meaningful and digestible way :)

I came here to say just that, but am quite intrigued by Joe's post and
James' response... I'll attempt to throw my hat in the ring on that.

I think that the overarching lack of awareness of the problem as such is
largely due to the narrow-mindedness necessary for many of the clinical
psychology scholars to make progress in this extremely competitive field..

Indeed, my time is becoming more and more filled with never-ending
scientific projects that boost all of my team's acclaim within the field,
as I work on a competitive team at a R1 research institute. The time and
dedication to these projects, as well as other duties (e.g., teaching,
supervision, therapy), requires such a level of dedication and sacrifice
that those who are established in the field are left with little brainpower
to dedicate to larger philosophical issues, problematic as they may be. I
find myself falling into this trap of attempting to turbocharge my CV with
publications, presentations, and other experience so that I can get to the
top of the competitive hierarchy of Clinical Psychology graduate school
applicants... That competitiveness never ends though, as clinical psych PhD
students need to dive even deeper and produce almost unrealistic scientific
activity to get a faculty position, which is extremely difficult, even with
the addition of several years of competitive post-doctoral research.

Faculty members are thus tasked with providing us, attempting to win
through the intense competition, with never-ending opportunity, so that we
can get that sweet spot that we've worked so hard to earn, in graduate
school, and further into our careers. I've seen this this past week as I've
seen the first participant in our $3 million dollar NIH-funded grant, but
only through extreme hard work, and now am trying to champion my own
projects that require the time and energy of others in the lab who are also
burdened with contributing to these huge projects. Indeed, after this
email, I'll need to dedicate a couple of hours of my relaxing Sunday
afternoon to my own project so that I'm not missing opportunities for
presentation and publication.

It's my view that more people should be concerned about coherence, but that
the avenues to that understanding are arduous and rife with conceptual
confusion. And who will fund them? The NIH as a funding body does not
distribute its resources to such issues, but is happy to dish out millions
to projects that are backed by the hard-earned careers of research faculty
in the field. This necessity of faculty members to meet extreme
expectations and obtain research funding in a hyper-competitive environment
leads to a lack of individuals focusing on the important meta-issues.
Further, there are no clear societal avenues to solving such problems, even
for those, like myself, who are interested in them! Rest assured, the
conceptual confusion in the field has bothered me since the first day I
decided to change my major to psychology from mechanical engineering...

That's just what my experience has been. I earned my degree at the end of
2018 with great grades and experience in 3 labs, and have been working in
the field as an interim lab manager and coordinator basically since then,
but I'll still need another year+ to be competitive enough for
research-based clinical psychology PhD programs, which will take me 6-years
to complete once I'm in, then another 2-3 years as an underpaid post-doc to
get a faculty position, so that I can devote all of my cognitive energy to
fueling the machine.

Not so sexy sounding when I type it out like that.

Thanks,

Cole Butler
Research Coordinator
Project Coordinator: Treating Parents with ADHD and their Children (TPAC
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__umdadhd.org_ongoing-2Dprojects-2Dand-2Dfunding&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=wnqRok_xw9SWQpyTDnu8hkHkuZ8VGYTpNFYeK25l-vo&s=TPyf1cNhQOHmPhz6_EQ08QFmsxMkOcSW9sZ_nbVEBAE&e= >)
SUCCEEDS <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__umdadhd.org_succeeds&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=wnqRok_xw9SWQpyTDnu8hkHkuZ8VGYTpNFYeK25l-vo&s=-6W15e1et_TXNHvSGWfev7SNMcKOoI8rq44eM_GrEk0&e= > Coach
University of Maryland
UMD ADHD Lab <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.umdadhd.org_cole&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=wnqRok_xw9SWQpyTDnu8hkHkuZ8VGYTpNFYeK25l-vo&s=7gbaFwDIRREEGtmmwU-F8VvVMnhuELuyv2nCaaqF5Z8&e= >
2103W, Cole Field House | College Park, MD 20742
tel 301.405.6163


On Sun, Aug 9, 2020 at 3:11 PM James Lyons-Weiler <
[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Great perspective and a good discussion on the relevance and importance of
> Gregg's work and contributions.
>
> Taking a view of a historian of Science practiced in the art of clinical
> translational research, I would offer the following perspectives.
>
> The frustrating aspects of both sociology and psychology stem from a lack
> of a framework within which it is understood HOW the labors of basic and
> applied research can be brought forward (in practice) to the end of the
> reduction of human pain and suffering.
>
> This is a layer on top of and is influenced by the problems with
> observational research (listen to 3 bootcamp episodes at
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__unbreakingscience.com&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=wnqRok_xw9SWQpyTDnu8hkHkuZ8VGYTpNFYeK25l-vo&s=i4jcK7grB9rG7Pl8C0NGi2p4baOqzWKlkpimUsYYJos&e= 
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__unbreakingscience.com&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=lEl41OTIcj3KVwfnzP4LAATijGLeb3d9QjHdH2c6wdE&s=BesPKrOP0ULtLK0ZDru9PfSbu7ZzoGwvueNdhjhuyGo&e=>
> ).
>
> This also compares and stands somewhat in contrast to the promised Golden
> Era of medicine from clinical translational research where the focus (and
> funding) shifted from basic research (knowledge for its own sake) to
> applied research, and then from applied to translational research.
>
> Whether this is a normative ontology for Sciences to progress through
> aside, it would seem to me, after a rather deep dive into the problem of
> ADHD and the overuse of prescription drugs to treat problems that in any
> way involve the brain... and the preference for approaching such issues as
> drug- treatable problems... supplants and thereby aborts - meaningful
> progress in the psychological Sciences toward its own ends.
>
> This is owing to preferred investment toward pharmaceuticals (Pharm.
> psychiatry) by NIH, and because society more or less fails to see that
> understanding themselves, others and emergences from relationships is more
> sustainable than "feeling better" from a pill. Less time-consuming
> practically sells itself and easier to market.
>
> I would hasten to apologize for oversimplifying, for any unintended or
> unwarranted generalizations, and the general caveat that any perceived
> offense or slight is unintended.
>
> The value that I see is a framework for the discussion of all of these
> factors and others in the form of a metacognitive awareness of the science
> as a process and comprehension of the role of psychology and its impact and
> lessons for society.
>
> On Sun, Aug 9, 2020, 2:13 PM Joseph Michalski <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> Dear Gregg et al.:
>>
>> As an outsider to the field of psychology and even after years of working
>> with Gregg, I remain entirely flummoxed by "the problem of psychology." I
>> understand Gregg's views and proposed "solution," but the part I do not
>> understand is the extent to which "(a) how well documented this problem
>> is; (b) and how no one seems to care about it." Gregg then conveys "It
>> just blows my mind." Well, if that's the case, can you imagine what we are
>> missing or perhaps misunderstanding if we aren't even in a position to play
>> psychology's version of insider baseball? And then the non-psychologists
>> such as myself are left wondering even more confusedly what we should
>> believe or think about psychology. Truth be told, I've always held
>> psychology in much higher regard than sociology - my own discipline -
>> mainly because I've viewed the vast majority of psychologists at least in
>> academia as more committed to a scientific understanding of human behavior
>> - whatever that might mean to people. In contrast, let me share a bit of
>> sociology's "insider's baseball" so that those who are interested will
>> understand where I'm coming from in questioning the reaction, as Gregg has
>> advised (at least in terms of devoting four hours to the problem!). This
>> will be a long post with an attachment, so please ignore or file away if
>> not interested.
>>
>> From my perspective, the "problem of psychology" is part of the larger
>> problem of the "problem of the social sciences" more generally and, then,
>> at the more philosophical level, the even more complex "problems of
>> knowing" from an epistemological perspective (to say nothing of the
>> ontological issues that led to an exchange at JMU - Gregg's institution -
>> back in 1988 when a psychologist explained to me that nothing exists
>> outside of our minds and what we construct, such that if I stood on a train
>> track and did not believe a train was coming and no one else in that
>> observational frame believed a train was coming, then I would not be harmed
>> in any way by the impending arrival of the train...I'm not making that
>> up!). But what confuses me from the outset is the claim that no one seems
>> to be concerned with these issues in psychology. Is that truly the case?
>> I'd find that remarkable. What do the intellectual leaders in the field
>> have to say about these issues (meaning no disrespect to Gregg or his
>> standing in the field, as he's gaining in reputation and status year by
>> year - and yet no one I've spoken to in my university's department of
>> psychology has ever heard of him or his work)? I ask this because the
>> parallel issues have been long & vociferously debated in sociology, i.e.,
>> what is sociology, what is the nature of "social reality", what are our
>> fundamental explanandums (explananda?), the role of individual agency in
>> producing collective or group outcomes, and so forth. The biggest & highly
>> public debates have been about the basic purpose of sociology and what
>> we're supposed to be trying to accomplish as a discipline. As most of you
>> likely know, the result has been the sociology has always been and
>> continues to be even MORE fragmented than psychology, with multiple
>> paradigms and different "language games" that lead to the metaphorical
>> equivalence of one tribe speaking "English" and another speaking
>> "Mandarin", for example. They do not communicate very well with each other
>> and, in the extreme, hold the members or the other tribes in utter disdain.
>>
>> But, it's even worse. Gregg has referenced some of Jordan Peterson's work
>> & commentary in the past, including a short piece on Peterson's perspective
>> on the new website. What he does not mention, though, is the absolute
>> disgust that Peterson has toward sociology, which is driven by his belief
>> that mainstream sociology is more oriented toward ideological inculcation
>> than scientific investigation. And, to an extent, he's actually correct in
>> that assessment. But it starts from his own disciplinary base, where he
>> offers the following comments in one of his university lectures: “Measurement
>> is everything. And so much of what psychologists publish and write about is
>> incorrect. And the reason it is incorrect is that they do not have their
>> measurements properly instantiated. It’s a massive problem, especially in
>> social psychology. In fact, it’s probably a fatal problem in that most of
>> the things that social psychologists measure don’t exist. Social psychology
>> has been rife with scandals for the last four or five years and there’s
>> good reason for it, but a big part of the problem is that the measurement,
>> that people are not stringent and careful enough about their measurement.”
>>  (see https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.youtube.com_watch-3Fv-3DwEdBgRWkF-2DI&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=wnqRok_xw9SWQpyTDnu8hkHkuZ8VGYTpNFYeK25l-vo&s=1e-bVuiRtFzSHhxrIKZRzcyr4MPPy58YRv6YFWKQ9qc&e= 
>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.youtube.com_watch-3Fv-3DwEdBgRWkF-2DI&d=DwMGaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=RF34EDECF2zJ4S6owoJ84nzz5lFgfErNlSTXDT_aMd8&s=tODw1ulLKrN8Bjw5flSLmOy9XHm70db-3cmtOImH8Ms&e=>
>> ).
>>
>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.youtube.com_watch-3Fv-3DwEdBgRWkF-2DI&d=DwMGaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=RF34EDECF2zJ4S6owoJ84nzz5lFgfErNlSTXDT_aMd8&s=tODw1ulLKrN8Bjw5flSLmOy9XHm70db-3cmtOImH8Ms&e=>
>> Jordan Peterson tells you why Social Scientists are terrified of factor
>> analysis
>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.youtube.com_watch-3Fv-3DwEdBgRWkF-2DI&d=DwMGaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=RF34EDECF2zJ4S6owoJ84nzz5lFgfErNlSTXDT_aMd8&s=tODw1ulLKrN8Bjw5flSLmOy9XHm70db-3cmtOImH8Ms&e=>
>> What controls my choices? Why do I do what I do? In this lecture, he
>> begins discussing the development of modern trait theory. Psychologists,
>> expert in measurement and statistics, discovered extroversion, neuroticism,
>> agreeableness, conscientiousness and openness to experience, and began the
>> process of delineating their social significance and ...
>> www.youtube.com
>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.youtube.com&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=lEl41OTIcj3KVwfnzP4LAATijGLeb3d9QjHdH2c6wdE&s=LBDVImouO2_xjDJrueY70isBnmTf4WyG0q1AMICTSxw&e=>
>> Okay, but​ what about sociology and other cognate disciplines? Peterson
>> is quite unapologetic, "advising freshman students
>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wikipedia.org_wiki_Freshman&d=DwMGaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=RF34EDECF2zJ4S6owoJ84nzz5lFgfErNlSTXDT_aMd8&s=1OIZBbLiQRTlEE-qp35Mhf8Ch18QL1skVgEi2U_scPI&e=>
>>  to avoid subjects like sociology
>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wikipedia.org_wiki_Sociology&d=DwMGaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=RF34EDECF2zJ4S6owoJ84nzz5lFgfErNlSTXDT_aMd8&s=yuWhfGDvKzR5S5Rhp5kdCJWoGaEvp7w1EXi5z_TLQ2c&e=>
>> , anthropology
>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wikipedia.org_wiki_Anthropology&d=DwMGaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=RF34EDECF2zJ4S6owoJ84nzz5lFgfErNlSTXDT_aMd8&s=TX5gL1U69nX6g9m8sMXcvvKvMRAF2iGkeGtNctvp8nw&e=>
>> , English literature
>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wikipedia.org_wiki_English-5Fstudies&d=DwMGaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=RF34EDECF2zJ4S6owoJ84nzz5lFgfErNlSTXDT_aMd8&s=k6tRSafhUQLC-Ng-Agr44y04McK35dLUXYahsBdFe7Q&e=>
>> , ethnic studies
>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wikipedia.org_wiki_Ethnic-5Fstudies&d=DwMGaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=RF34EDECF2zJ4S6owoJ84nzz5lFgfErNlSTXDT_aMd8&s=BuDPwEZ104lKzN3xHkAu-kyVlhN-dTswlm4ndfbDemk&e=>,
>> and racial studies
>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wikipedia.org_wiki_Critical-5Frace-5Ftheory&d=DwMGaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=RF34EDECF2zJ4S6owoJ84nzz5lFgfErNlSTXDT_aMd8&s=Q4sLt5ZmmbK_ed3Iih2yFkb4DyAVHQcwFUSsHtGuX3A&e=>,
>> as well as other fields of study that he believes are corrupted by the neo-Marxist
>> ideology
>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wikipedia.org_wiki_Neo-2DMarxism&d=DwMGaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=RF34EDECF2zJ4S6owoJ84nzz5lFgfErNlSTXDT_aMd8&s=aGciJtkqJrGylaLSa6NUtHe_JYpeegdag4cigGmj9qc&e=>."
>> His criticisms have been quite public, such as his claims about sociology
>> as one of the many disciplinary "indoctrination cults" (see
>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.cbc.ca_radio_asithappens_as-2Dit-2Dhappens-2Dfriday-2Dedition-2D1.4396970_u-2Dof-2Dt-2Dprofs-2Dalarmed-2Dby-2Djordan-2Dpeterson-2Ds-2Dplan-2Dto-2Dtarget-2Dclasses-2Dhe-2Dcalls-2Dindoctrination-2Dcults-2D1.4396974&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=wnqRok_xw9SWQpyTDnu8hkHkuZ8VGYTpNFYeK25l-vo&s=AjJHln7uwAIxV1CN51g7IbJeaJCxGRBK4j6sWzPaffU&e= 
>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.cbc.ca_radio_asithappens_as-2Dit-2Dhappens-2Dfriday-2Dedition-2D1.4396970_u-2Dof-2Dt-2Dprofs-2Dalarmed-2Dby-2Djordan-2Dpeterson-2Ds-2Dplan-2Dto-2Dtarget-2Dclasses-2Dhe-2Dcalls-2Dindoctrination-2Dcults-2D1.4396974&d=DwMGaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=RF34EDECF2zJ4S6owoJ84nzz5lFgfErNlSTXDT_aMd8&s=bi7cscE5GCtWQhD9HXsqal-ujxcjdqRXsxSAVq61A9c&e=>).
>> These many wayward disciplines have been "corrupted" in Peterson's view
>> (see
>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__torontosun.com_2017_06_29_jordan-2Dpeterson-2Dcertain-2Duniversity-2Ddisciplines-2Dcorrupted_wcm_9189041e-2D131b-2D4fb7-2Da501-2D0136e86790f3&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=wnqRok_xw9SWQpyTDnu8hkHkuZ8VGYTpNFYeK25l-vo&s=7uwwz4W1hNFvpWDCFIJ_NPapo8EU6s5uBguK2gilSqY&e= 
>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__torontosun.com_2017_06_29_jordan-2Dpeterson-2Dcertain-2Duniversity-2Ddisciplines-2Dcorrupted_wcm_9189041e-2D131b-2D4fb7-2Da501-2D0136e86790f3&d=DwMGaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=RF34EDECF2zJ4S6owoJ84nzz5lFgfErNlSTXDT_aMd8&s=ejo48UpmKNPnXUYfKVpt3WQNVnQaPPp4WwGnsOxiUIw&e=>
>>
>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__torontosun.com_2017_06_29_jordan-2Dpeterson-2Dcertain-2Duniversity-2Ddisciplines-2Dcorrupted_wcm_9189041e-2D131b-2D4fb7-2Da501-2D0136e86790f3&d=DwMGaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=RF34EDECF2zJ4S6owoJ84nzz5lFgfErNlSTXDT_aMd8&s=ejo48UpmKNPnXUYfKVpt3WQNVnQaPPp4WwGnsOxiUIw&e=>
>> Jordan Peterson: Certain university disciplines 'corrupted' | Toronto Sun
>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__torontosun.com_2017_06_29_jordan-2Dpeterson-2Dcertain-2Duniversity-2Ddisciplines-2Dcorrupted_wcm_9189041e-2D131b-2D4fb7-2Da501-2D0136e86790f3&d=DwMGaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=RF34EDECF2zJ4S6owoJ84nzz5lFgfErNlSTXDT_aMd8&s=ejo48UpmKNPnXUYfKVpt3WQNVnQaPPp4WwGnsOxiUIw&e=>
>> TORONTO. Outspoken University of Toronto Prof. Jordan Peterson says his
>> latest mission is to try to “stop (university) indoctrination in its
>> tracks” by advising freshman students to avoid ...
>> torontosun.com
>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__torontosun.com&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=lEl41OTIcj3KVwfnzP4LAATijGLeb3d9QjHdH2c6wdE&s=PfEsI0qDNQ-DcxSKA_ynMbuQdhnkATsSL8YYP_KqSkQ&e=>
>>
>>
>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.cbc.ca_radio_asithappens_as-2Dit-2Dhappens-2Dfriday-2Dedition-2D1.4396970_u-2Dof-2Dt-2Dprofs-2Dalarmed-2Dby-2Djordan-2Dpeterson-2Ds-2Dplan-2Dto-2Dtarget-2Dclasses-2Dhe-2Dcalls-2Dindoctrination-2Dcults-2D1.4396974&d=DwMGaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=RF34EDECF2zJ4S6owoJ84nzz5lFgfErNlSTXDT_aMd8&s=bi7cscE5GCtWQhD9HXsqal-ujxcjdqRXsxSAVq61A9c&e=>
>> U of T profs alarmed by Jordan Peterson's plan to target classes he calls
>> 'indoctrination cults' | CBC Radio
>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.cbc.ca_radio_asithappens_as-2Dit-2Dhappens-2Dfriday-2Dedition-2D1.4396970_u-2Dof-2Dt-2Dprofs-2Dalarmed-2Dby-2Djordan-2Dpeterson-2Ds-2Dplan-2Dto-2Dtarget-2Dclasses-2Dhe-2Dcalls-2Dindoctrination-2Dcults-2D1.4396974&d=DwMGaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=RF34EDECF2zJ4S6owoJ84nzz5lFgfErNlSTXDT_aMd8&s=bi7cscE5GCtWQhD9HXsqal-ujxcjdqRXsxSAVq61A9c&e=>
>> Jordan Peterson's plan to build a website aimed at reducing enrolment in
>> university classes he calls "indoctrination cults" has drawn the ire of his
>> University of Toronto colleagues.
>> www.cbc.ca
>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.cbc.ca&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=lEl41OTIcj3KVwfnzP4LAATijGLeb3d9QjHdH2c6wdE&s=bpotlNsgmLteuH2F_tCPKcLCE0dfbp_7jNiUJth1wSg&e=>
>> As you might imagine, I might be inclined to react somewhat defensively
>> to such an attack on my own discipline, to say nothing of the many other
>> fields he's attempting to delegitimize. As a Sociology Dept Chair and then
>> as an Assoc Academic Dean until last year, I certainly have held different
>> views about these fields and their contributions to our knowledge. And yet,
>> as mentioned, there's a kernel of truth in some of his critique as well.
>> But I was investigating these issues *empirically* even before Peterson
>> rose to public stardom (and, quite frankly, before I'd ever even heard of
>> the guy). What did I find?
>>
>> At least in Canada, the clear majority of sociologists self-identified as
>> "critical theorists" and/or as "feminist sociologists", largely questioning
>> if not eschewing altogether the "positivist" and/or "scientific" (at least
>> the "hegemonic" aspects) foundations of sociology. I've attached the
>> article, if interested. If not, here's the summary info from the abstract
>> worth noting: "The paper focuses on the extent of epistemological diversity
>> in an effort to answer two key questions. First, what intellectual
>> perspectives prevail among Canadian sociologists and, along these lines,
>> does any particular perspective hold greater prominence? Second, what might
>> explain the variation in the epistemological stances most commonly
>> endorsed? The evidence reveals a preponderance of critical and feminist
>> scholars, which can be explained in large measure by considering the social
>> locations of sociological practitioners. The results of a logistic
>> regression model confirm that gender, generation, geography, and
>> disciplinary genre are significant predictors of critical and
>> critical-feminist orientations." In short, I argue that people's "social
>> locations" are strong predictors or determinants of their intellectual
>> orientations - a sociological explanation for why sociologists tend to "do"
>> certain types of sociology or hold the perspectives on the discipline that
>> they do. And that explains a lot, even without delving into the
>> psychological mechanisms. About 2 out of every 3 people teaching in
>> sociology departments in Canada state that they hold some type of "critical
>> perspective" and/or "feminist" perspective in their teaching & research,
>> identifying their mission as committed to social change and social
>> justice." One person stated that "I think my overall ‘mission’ has to do
>> with helping citizens to see through the veil of mystification that, often
>> powerful, others have erected and reproduced (albeit not always
>> consciously) that is a powerful barrier to needed changes in Canadian
>> society and beyond."
>>
>> In contrast, less than one in five (about 18%) stated that they endorsed
>> a more scientific and/or positivist orientation toward their subject. But
>> the qualitative aspect of the study (which I report on to a degree as well)
>> reveal a rather straightforward set of justifications that people advance
>> to defend their particular orientations. Here's just a snippet, for example:
>>
>> "Many respondents combined feminist and critical perspectives, often with
>> interpretive or post-modernist orientations as well. For example, one
>> participant described her approach as “feminist critical realism,”
>> stressing the need to “link sociology to ideas about social justice.”
>> Another identified the main purpose of research as “a means of questioning,
>> challenging and resisting the dominant discourses in which we are always
>> enmeshed.” With a commitment to feminism, constructivism, and
>> post-structuralism, that person stressed the need to “critically understand
>> the society in which you live (and) the position of your own ‘self’ within
>> that society. That requires a life-long commitment to the search for
>> ‘truth’ which opposes contemporary relations of power, situated in dominant
>> discourses.”
>>
>> Finally, the big debate in sociology in recent years has been the degree
>> and extent to which we should be engaged in "public sociology" and more
>> directly involved in advocacy, challenging the status quo with our facts
>> and analyses, and engaging in different forms of "resistance." You can
>> certainly discuss flaws in the system, who hold power and who's
>> disadvantaged, and things late hate crimes in sociology courses. But you
>> have to be quite careful NOT to sound like you're in any way supporting or
>> justifying the "status quo," which is viewed as a code word for
>> "oppression". But that's getting too far down in the weeds. The bigger
>> point is that we have no consensus in sociology not only in regard to the
>> subject matter or methods (we allegedly value having "a big epistemological
>> tent"), but also in terms of the very raison d'etre for our existence.
>> There's no common mission that I can identify, although a plurality of
>> self-identified sociologists believe in some variant of what I've shared
>> only briefly in the preceding paragraph.
>>
>> So, back to psychology. Is it indeed the case that nearly everyone -
>> including the thought leaders - either do not see "the problem of
>> psychology" and/or "do not care"? I honestly just don't know what the
>> serious alternativex are, if any, to Gregg's perspective. That's partly why
>> I buy in so whole-heartedly. In other words, if I've only studied
>> Catholicism and do not know that there are any other perspectives on
>> religion, then why would I question the "fundamentals" of the Messiah
>> explaining the nature and meaning of the Catholic religion? I'd have only
>> the most limited of reference points or ability to question the fundamental
>> "truth" of what's being promoted. So, in my narrow frame of reference, I
>> gravitate toward Gregg's ToK perspective because: a) it makes a lot of
>> "sense" to me; b) it deals effectively with the bigger issues in which I'm
>> interested beyond my own discipline; c) it has a placeholder for the
>> contribution of sociology; and d) it seems to be open to critique and
>> refinement - unlike many other meta-perspectives or "paradigms" to which
>> I've been exposed over the course of the roughly 35,000 books and articles
>> I have read over the past 3 decades (that's not a boast, but more of an
>> admission of frustration - imagine the pianist or guitarist I'd be today if
>> I'd spent those tens of thousands of hours engaged in THOSE activities
>> rather than reading everything I could get my hands on... By comparison,
>> I've only published about 50 peer-reviewed books and articles in total -
>> and almost none of the work particularly noteworthy!). Plus, Gregg's such a
>> nice guy and fun to work with! But is he "right"? What are the limits of
>> these views he and "we" are promoting, both in publications and in our
>> social media communications - including this list serve? We've had the
>> occasional dissenting or contrarian views presented, but, alas, the most
>> aggressive of these have not always been, um, "civil" and a couple of folks
>> have left the list. But should we not be inviting into the discussions
>> those with different views and has these out in reasoned discussions here
>> and elsewhere? I mean, I'd love it if just some of the psychologists from
>> my own institution would weigh in on these matters, or the "problem of
>> psychology." It'd be fascinating to hear what they have to say. Or maybe we
>> should have people from other disciplines, myself included, weigh in more
>> with other kinds of problems in addition to or to build upon "the problem
>> of psychology."
>>
>> Okay, I hope I've conveyed my thoughts in a reasonably coherent fashion.
>> As some of you know, I've taken the last few months "off" from academia to
>> focus on landscaping and deck-building and helping people move rather than
>> on these "big questions." Whatever their politics or intellectual
>> orientations, I can vouch that basically every single person I've helped or
>> worked for has expressed a deep appreciation for the instrumental aid I
>> have provided and for the "beauty" of the gift of helping them solve a
>> practical, environmental or aesthetic problem they've been having. Plus,
>> they seem to like to have someone kind in their lives to share their
>> stories with... I can see why some psychologists might gravitate toward
>> being "clinicians" and why many sociologists gravitate toward being
>> "activists." Nice to see "positive" change" and to be helpful, I suppose.
>> Enough said. Entropy always wins in the end and we all fade away. I may not
>> have much more to contribute, but I hope I've highlighted some important
>> concerns or alerted the group to some potential blind spots... Peace, -Joe
>>
>>
>>
>> Dr. Joseph H. Michalski
>>
>> Professor
>>
>> King’s University College at Western University
>>
>> 266 Epworth Avenue, DL-201
>>
>> London, Ontario, Canada  N6A 2M3
>>
>> Tel: (519) 433-3491
>>
>> Email: [log in to unmask]
>>
>> ______________________
>>
>> *ei*π + 1 = 0
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>> *From:* tree of knowledge system discussion <
>> [log in to unmask]> on behalf of Henriques, Gregg - henriqgx
>> <[log in to unmask]>
>> *Sent:* Sunday, August 9, 2020 10:24 AM
>> *To:* [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
>> *Subject:* Videos on the Problem of Psychology and Its Solution
>>
>>
>> HI TOK List,
>>
>> I completed my video series on the Problem of Psychology and Its
>> Solution. It consists of the “long version,” which involves two parts. Part
>> I is a two-hour overview of the Problem of Psychology
>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__drive.google.com_file_d_1Jn1l5-2D-2Dy9MrkphbRLirXgAbYCNwj5uEI_view-3Fusp-3Dsharing&d=DwMGaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=RF34EDECF2zJ4S6owoJ84nzz5lFgfErNlSTXDT_aMd8&s=zHBpAnhkMvvkdHJvREZPopQUsmloVyNEuWkQGycD1jU&e=>,
>> focusing on the history and the various paradigms (for the slide deck only
>> of Part I, see here
>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__drive.google.com_file_d_1lHajAJFaEluYfwNCU0Lfah2-2Dc-2DtDVT3C_view-3Fusp-3Dsharing&d=DwMGaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=RF34EDECF2zJ4S6owoJ84nzz5lFgfErNlSTXDT_aMd8&s=SdEjrnUflDAeYv0_WtumWko7uOrPkWS6yE_Auau0LC4&e=>).
>> Part II
>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__drive.google.com_file_d_1NPbgaR1rsnAxWdkTV4idNTv0qtx6ty7H_view-3Fusp-3Dsharing&d=DwMGaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=RF34EDECF2zJ4S6owoJ84nzz5lFgfErNlSTXDT_aMd8&s=AeYMSOwf3V9CZIDfg0DxlCdn_PXuIfG9u193WW25gVY&e=>
>> (slide deck only is here
>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__drive.google.com_file_d_14-5FeSPo7cJ8bga-5FVhDd2pTG7TxoVXt7z8_view-3Fusp-3Dsharing&d=DwMGaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=RF34EDECF2zJ4S6owoJ84nzz5lFgfErNlSTXDT_aMd8&s=vKL7mlDU-qLYrtIOYMQxuf9Kt6Mv46bPpSiIk1LbPtM&e=>)
>> is an hour and forty-minute description of how the Unified Theory solves
>> the problem.
>>
>> Of course, who has almost four hours to devote to this issue?
>>
>> [From where I sit in the landscape of knowledge, I do encourage you to
>> question that reaction. The reason is that the problem of psychology is
>> diagnostic of the single most serious problem with Western (and *especially
>> Anglo-American*) knowledge systems. It shows, with absolute certainty,
>> that our system of thought does not know how to talk about mind, behavior,
>> and science with coherence. That, folks, is truly remarkable. And what is
>> even more remarkable is (a) how well documented this problem is; (b) and
>> how no one seems to care about it. It just blows my mind. So, next time you
>> find yourself mumbling about how it seems we are all confused, and nobody
>> knows anything, then remember this post. The root of a huge amount of
>> confusion is found in our inability to define science, mind, and behavior
>> in the English language!]
>>
>> Actually, I get that folks don’t have time for the deep dive. So, HERE
>> is the shortened version; The Summary of the Problem and Its Solution
>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__drive.google.com_file_d_1ejNjYXKv-2DBJ458yxzuZRTjCuu3mxpfM3_view-3Fusp-3Dsharing&d=DwMGaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=RF34EDECF2zJ4S6owoJ84nzz5lFgfErNlSTXDT_aMd8&s=dnhUafuljfT14rBmU8DnsXw5i16hF_X847-InJdcCSA&e=>.
>> A focused 30 min romp through the issues. About the length of a sitcom 😊
>> .
>>
>> Best,
>> Gregg
>>
>>
>> ############################
>>
>> 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
>> ############################
>>
>> 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
>>
> ############################
>
> 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
>

############################

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