Re: The scientific status of PCP
mmascolo@merrimack.edu
Sat, 15 Jun 1996 11:06:48 EST
Lois Shawver and Bill Ramsay write:
>
>>Brian Gaines:
>>
>>Pardon me for coming in rather late in the discussion, but I would like
>>help understanding why you say that science-religion cannot serve as a
>>bipolar construct. Are you sayin that this would not make an adequate
>>construct in the Kelly tradition? Couldn't we do a rep test and see that
>>someone had a personal construct that distinguished "science" from
>>"religion"? Or are you using the term "construct" in a different way?
>>
>>What do you mean here, for example? I'm not an expert on Kelly, but this
>>doesn't sound like Kelly, to me:
>>
>>> Some aspects of science and some aspects of religion may be construed
>>> on each pole of these three constructs. They are not bipolar unless one
>>> very clearly defines those aspects.
>>
>>..Lois Shawver
>
>With you, Lois. Much of what Brian says in this posting sems to me to
>violate the individuality corollary. I admit it's not hard to do, and Brian
>is not the only, and not always a, transgressor, but the frequency with
>which it seems to happen on the list bothers me, as a peripheral PCPer.
>
I cannot speak for Brian, but I agree with his view on this issue.
Yes, according to the individuality corrollary, individuals can create a
wide variety of dichotomous constructs, including religion-science. The
question is: Is that the only dichotomy that can be created? Is it
somehow a valid or natural one? Is science *really* in opposition to
science -- well in some ways yes, in others no. It seems to me, as others
have articulated, the dogmatism-critical reflection dichotomy (and others)
like it are more useful in describing and evaluating systems that purport
to describe the world. Some versions of religion embody much critical
reflection and little dogmatism; some people who call themselves scientists
do otherwise.
Remember: I can define individuality in contradistinction to dependence
-- I get a very different construct if I define individuality in opposition
to interdependence, or if I define dependence in opposition to lonliness.
There are many ways of parsing our experince.
Mike Mascolo
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%