RE: Constructivist Risk

Lindsay Oades ( (no email) )
6 Oct 1995 13:32:17 +1000

AJ et al,
Kelly referred to a propositional construct as one which does not disturb the
other realm memberships of its elements. I would love you to expand on your
claim that "It would seem to me that when one uses a construct
propositionally, there is some comprehension that the construct will be
invalid. Less threatening, more choice ". What does this mean in terms of an
adolescent who is choosing, (in a Kellyan sense), with a partner, to use or
not use a condom before having sex?

Lindsay Oades
Wollongong
_______________________________________________________________________________
To: Lindsay Oades; pcp@mailbase.ac.uk
From: pcp@mailbase.ac.uk on Fri, 6 Oct 1995 8:25 AM
Subject: Re: Constructivist Risk
RFC Header:Received: by uow.edu.au with SMTP;6 Oct 1995 08:24:57 +1000
Received: from whisp.cs.uow.edu.au (whisp.cs.uow.edu.au [130.130.64.5]) by
wyrm.cc.uow.edu.au (8.6.10/8.6.11) with ESMTP id IAA03395; Fri, 6 Oct 1995
08:24:59 +1000
Received: from norn.mailbase.ac.uk (norn.ncl.ac.uk [128.240.226.1]) by
whisp.cs.uow.edu.au (8.6.10/8.6.9) with ESMTP id GAA28279; Fri, 6 Oct 1995
06:44:07 +1000
Received: by norn.mailbase.ac.uk id <UAA05739@norn.mailbase.ac.uk>
(8.6.12/ for mailbase.ac.uk); Thu, 5 Oct 1995 20:57:27 +0100
Received: from nsuca by norn.mailbase.ac.uk id <UAA05689@norn.mailbase.ac.uk>
(8.6.12/ for mailbase.ac.uk) with SMTP; Thu, 5 Oct 1995 20:57:19 +0100
Received: from cc1.uca.EDU by nsuca (5.64/A/UX-3.00)
id AA23415; Thu, 5 Oct 95 14:58:40 CDT
Received: from CC1/MAILQUEUE by cc1.uca.edu (Mercury 1.11);
Thu, 5 Oct 95 15:03:53 +3600
Received: from MAILQUEUE by CC1 (Mercury 1.11); Thu, 5 Oct 95 15:03:23 +3600
To: "Lindsay Oades" <Lindsay_Oades@uow.edu.au>, pcp@mailbase.ac.uk
From: "A. J. Zolten" <AJZOLTEN@cc1.uca.edu>
Date: 5 Oct 95 15:03:20 CST6CDT
Subject: Re: Constructivist Risk
Priority: normal
X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail v2.3 (R5).
Message-Id: <3078BD16109@cc1.uca.edu>
X-List: pcp@mailbase.ac.uk
Reply-To: pcp@mailbase.ac.uk
Sender: pcp-request@mailbase.ac.uk
Precedence: list

Lindsay,

Have you considered the use of "propositionality" as part of your
construction of risk? It would seem to me that when one uses a
construct propositionaally, there is some comprehension that the
construct will be invalid. Less threatening, more choice.

A.J. Zolten,
Univ. of Central AR

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%