Personally, I have no problem with all sorts of people
subscribing to this list, regardless of background experience or
knowledge of PCP. Having said this, if someone wants to discuss
their pet theory they should not feel slighted if there is little
response to such a post. For me the problem with some of the
more controversial recent posts was that they were so dominant
and if others did not wish to engage in debate on these terms
some great conspiracy was perceived.
I thought Gary's initial request for substantiation of PCP was
not unreasonable as these things should be approached critically.
However, despite what I thought were some very detailed and good
responses from others the request for justification continued and
continued. Further, if every new member adopted this approach
the list would go around in very small ever decreasing circles.
I think the idea of having a description of Kelly's theory and
some references would be a useful addition to the information
which gets routinely sent to new members of the list. Also I
think a blurb on netiquette and consequences of repeated breaches
of this should be included. The issue then isn't one of
censorship but breach of conditions of membership.
To me it's all a bit like travelling. If you go to a foreign
country you can't expect everyone to justify why they do things
certain ways or expect others to do things your way. A bit of
prior reading will make the trip more worthwhile and reduces the
likelihood that you will offend other unnecesarily.
Having made the above pronouncement, can anyone tell me if there
is someway to access via the interent, past contents pages of the
Journal of Constructivist Psychology.
Regards,
Bob Green
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%