Speculations on Intelligent Design, & the Real World Options

[DWB04]

Gabrielle and DWBO4

I'm certain that part of the developmental and learning disorders could be the result of misdiagnosis and the negative effects of our environment. Much of the misdiagnosis may be the result of profiteering drug companies.

I was also considering society may be failing to recognize its own new specialized needs and under-utilizing what may be specialized abilities for a new environment. Maybe the  perceived "disorders" are just "re-orders" or even adaptations.

It seems that education tries to put everyone in the same learning modes, but maybe it was never meant to be that way. Maybe these are specialized humans adapting to a faster-paced, media rich, critical-detail-oriented, technology-driven society, and complex society.

The face-to-face social skills are less needed. We are definitely more introverted than ever before. Look at how anti-social the corporate cube farms are. Maybe the lack of face-to-face social skills are being displaced by the specialized abilities in the form of what appears to be developmental and learning disorders.

Certainly some things worth thinking about, Bill.....it is a high tech world.......and there is a lack of quality social interaction .......some futurists like Alvin Toffler spoke about the impact of the information age years ago....and I'm sure some of those things factor in when considering a better approach to the adaptive skills that may be required of us in order to make sense of our world.

I do think though that there are many factors we can trace to the problem of learning and development...... however, I do also understand where you are going with this in terms of considering adaptive vs maladaptive syndromes......we have often thought of groups of people as being sub par and failed to factor in other information.....take intelligence tests for one......the earliest ones neglected other skills.

This post has been edited by DWB04: Mar 2 2005, 02:30 PM

[DWB04]

The Social Learning Theory of
Julian B. Rotter

The main idea in Julian Rotter's Social Learning Theory is that personality represents an interaction of the individual with his or her environment. One cannot speak of a personality, internal to the individual, that is independent of the environment. Neither can one focus on behavior as being an automatic response to an objective set of environmental stimuli. Rather, to understand behavior, one must take both the individual (i.e., his or her life history of learning and experiences) and the environment (i.e., those stimuli that the person is aware of and responding to) into account. Rotter describes personality as a relatively stable set of potentials for responding to situations in a particular way.

Psychopathology and Treatment. Rotter is very opposed to the medical model conception of mental disorders as being diseases or illnesses. Rather, he conceives of psychological problems as maladaptive behavior brought about by faulty or inadequate learning experiences. For Rotter, the symptoms of pathology, like all behavior, are learned. Therefore, treatment should be considered a learning situation where adaptive behaviors and cognitions are taught, and the therapist-client relationship is viewed as being similar to a teacher-student relationship. Much of current cognitive-behavioral treatment has its roots in Rotter's social learning theory, although these debts often go unacknowledged.

http://psych.fullerton.edu/jmearns/rotter.htm



some interesting information regarding learning deficits.....

http://www.pediatricneurology.com/autism.h...stic%20Disorder



Listen to children with Aspergers syndrome

http://www.pediatricneurology.com/aspergers_sound.htm



Interventional Therapy in learning and development for children

http://www.childmdim.com/resources/interve...t_practices.asp



Social and Emotional Development

http://classweb.gmu.edu/awinsler/ordp/social.html#temp


Of interest....Social Theorists.......you might like this site Bill

http://www.trinity.edu/~mkearl/theory.html

According to Karl Popper (Logik der Forschung, 1935: p.26), Theory is "the net which we throw out in order to catch the world--to rationalize, explain, and dominate it." Through history, sociological theory arose out of attempts to make sense of times of dramatic social change. As Hans Gerth and C. Wright Mills observed in Character and Social Structure (Harbinger Books, 1964:xiii), "Problems of the nature of human nature are raised most urgently when the life-routines of a society are disturbed, when men are alienated from their social roles in such a way as to open themselves up for new insight."

This post has been edited by DWB04: Mar 2 2005, 04:35 PM

[Gabrielle]

Gabrielle and DWBO4

I'm certain that part of the developmental and learning disorders could be the result of misdiagnosis and the negative effects of our environment. Much of the misdiagnosis may be the result of profiteering drug companies.

I was also considering society may be failing to recognize its own new specialized needs and under-utilizing what may be specialized abilities for a new environment. Maybe the  perceived "disorders" are just "re-orders" or even adaptations.

It seems that education tries to put everyone in the same learning modes, but maybe it was never meant to be that way. Maybe these are specialized humans adapting to a faster-paced, media rich, critical-detail-oriented, technology-driven society, and complex society.

The face-to-face social skills are less needed. We are definitely more introverted than ever before. Look at how anti-social the corporate cube farms are. Maybe the lack of face-to-face social skills are being displaced by the specialized abilities in the form of what appears to be developmental and learning disorders.

I've never heard it framed this way before. That what we are labelling as "disability" may actually be a specialized need that's being frustrated by society's neglect. I don't think we have any way to assess children at a young age, see what they're good at and push them in that direction. But I like the idea. Well, we have the tools to assess children but mostly use these to pathologize them or point to areas where they are not measuring up to the "standard."

Montessori schools provide a very interesting alternative to the standard methods of education. In their schools self-directed learning is the norm. Students work at their own pace and choose what they want to work on. When they're naturally good at math they can work on math. I recently toured a Montessori school that went until the 8th grade. There was a tour by one of the 8th graders.

All the children were very studiously attending to their chosen projects. Much of the work was done on the floor as children naturally play on the floor. They were collaborating in small groups of two - maybe three - but quietly. One child was allowed to bring her puppy to school. I was told by our 8th grade tour guide that the 4-5 year old girl was allowed to bring her puppy to school because that's what she was most interested in learning about and her experiences with her puppy were able to teach her about the responsibility of taking care of a pet.

Touring that school was like walking through a lab where artists were drawing, scientists were tinkering around with beakers, and the school's mathemetician was up in the highest room in the building with a great big math book. All in their own private learning heavens, undisturbed by 'norms.' I was informed by our guide that "nobody could understand what their resident math genius was reading in his book anymore." Not even his teachers. He had become his own math teacher. The great thing was they allowed him to do it! And I thought this was the way education should be.

They also had a great big bird cage with a large exotic bird in it. Two 7-8 year old boys were reading a science book in front of the bird cage. Our guide told us that these and other children were often fascinated by the bird and they would incorporate caring for the bird, the priveledge of studying out in the hallway in front of the bird cage, as a way to facilitate learning.

One class spent an entire year on a class project. They "built their own imaginary island" and populated it with plants, animals, people, government, etc. It then became their job to manage their island. The guide said the kids really were into creating and maintaining their island in such a way that it thrived.

I also noticed they advanced the children far faster than in regular curricula. 7 or 8 year olds were in the library area doing internet research projects, for example! They were being taught early how to go to the internet to look for the information they need. Interestingly they were sent in pairs to do their interenet research. Don't know why that is. Kids were also allowed to bring their own laptop computers to school if they had them.

Each of their "classes" consists of three years combined. For example 1st, 2nd and 3rd grades are in the same class. In the first grade they learn from third graders. By the time they get to 3rd grade they're expected to teach the 1st graders the skills they've learned. The theory is that the children are often better teachers than the teachers themselves. Plus teaching reinforces their learning and teaches them the art of teaching.

I think the 7th & 8th graders were responsible for tours and for ordering the lunches from local stores, taking care of the money, budgeting money for various school functions and getting involved with the administration of the school.

They also had little cubby holes for the children to take a nap if they were tired. They had 10 minutes or so to take a midmorning snack and were responsible for deciding when they wanted to have their stack, for going down to the kitchen and preparing it (if old enough) and for getting back on time. Our guide told us "time management" was something they stressed a great deal at the shool.

It seemed to me that each child was allowed to excell in their own way, at their own pace and more or less in their own direction. I saw tremendous respect for the child there. There were basic competencies a child had to master but was given three years to do so. Extra time with the teacher and special tutors were brought in from the community. Parents were expected to come and participate, talk about their careers, etc.

My mother went with me and she was very disturbed by what she saw. She said it was eerie watching the children who she thought were behaving like little automatrons. She thought they were brain washed by some sort of behavioral modification techniques. They were all extremely absorbed in their studies and hardly noticed when we entered the room and walked around observing them. It was kind of like watching a bunch of kids all playing game boys. You wave your hand in front of them and say, "Hello... hello... " to no avail. They're lost in their own little internal world. I attributed this to the fact that the education was working. Kids more interested in learning than they are in the novelty of a stranger entering the room are children who have very successfully been shown how satisfying learning can be.

I had the distinct impression they assumed different children's brains would be specialized in different ways. Instead of forcing them all to fit in the same mold they allowed them to find their own path. The only things that were required of all were compassion, civic duty, time management, etc.

I think you may be onto something about allowing children to follow their aptitude.

I'm not in favor of the increasing social isolation technology brings. It does allow us to find people with which we share similar interests, goals, compatibilities. But humans are social animals. We are wired for direct person to person interactions. If a baby is raised without appropriate physical contact from nurturing caregivers, but given all the food and nourishment it needs, it will develop what's called "Failure to Thrive" and not gain any weight.

Adults probably don't suffer nearly as much as a child would without direct social contact.

This post has been edited by Gabrielle: Mar 2 2005, 06:58 PM

[DWB04]

All the children were very studiously attending to their chosen projects.  Much of Touring that school was like walking through a lab where artists were drawing, scientists were tinkering around with beakers, and the school's mathemetician was up in the highest room in the building with a great big math book. All in their own private learning heavens, undisturbed by 'norms.'  I was informed by our guide that "nobody could  understand what their resident math genius was reading in his book anymore." Not even his teachers.  He had become his own math teacher. The great thing was they allowed him to do it!  And I thought this was the way education should be. 

Each of their "classes" consists of three years combined.  For example 1st, 2nd and 3rd grades are in the same class.  In the first grade they learn from third graders.  By the time they get to 3rd grade they're expected to teach the 1st graders the skills they've learned.  The theory is that the children are often better teachers than the teachers themselves.  Plus teaching reinforces their learning and teaches them the art of teaching. 


Adults probably don't suffer nearly as much as a child would without direct social contact.

both wonderful ideas in my opinion!!!!

In fact as a child I use to pretend to be a teacher to my sister...needless to say I was a bit overzealous!! But then I set high requirements and standards!
anyway, I can can take that in wholly and say yes, that works!!!!

It made me study harder!!!!

[TheRestofUs]

I haven't been here for awhile and I haven't read all the intervening posts! But I copied and pasted this post of mine from another thread "You Liberals are Clueless"! I think it relates to the discussion of Metaphors here and what we are facing in general within the society. This affects Science and Schools because a "Bright" "Open" mind set is needed for Science and Learning to flourish!

The post is as follows;

"I think the whole model represented by Robert E. Lee, "Stonewall" Jackson , Jeb Stuart, Etc. and adored by many conservatives IS the "Strict Father" Metaphor. This is the metaphor that is beating the Liberal "Nurturant Parent" Model.

The Strict Father model as described by Lakoff includes the characteristics exhibited by the Southern Conservative,and Conservatives in general. Back in Civil War times it had already been fully developed (in fact it is thousands of years old). A "Strong" Male Father figure in charge, the female subordinated to the male. The Father as the final arbitor of what is "good" and "bad" , right and wrong, superior and inferior. In essense the representative and proxy for "God" on earth.

We can go into this further, but I see a problem aside from the obvious. In Jungian terms while we all have a "Father Complex" which responds to the "Strict Father" Metaphor, there is the possibility for these Metaphors and Complexes to be "contaminated" by the "Shadow".

For those not familiar with Jungian terminology; The "Shadow" is a representation of those aspects of a human psyche that are rejected by the conscious mind. IE.. the denied truths, the uncomfortable facts one doesn't want to deal with. These ideas/feelings are shoved out of sight by the conscious mind and reside in the unconscious. They don't stay there or become dormant. One could say they "fester" and become (for want of a better term) our "inner demons"! These "Shadow" aspects of our mind are often responsible for the phenomenon of projection. Whereby we "perceive" evil in others, because we unconsciously sense in their outward personality or actions, a reflection of those secret aspects of ourselves.

We ALL do this to a greater or lesser degree! I do it! In fact, Picadilly, Indianhead, Heart, and Tomhye could reasonably make a case that that's what I've just been doing in the previous posts! Perhaps this is true. But alot of the worst effects of a "Shadow Accident" are ameliorated by OWNING ones' own shadow, thereby integrating it back into ones conscious mind in a healthy way. (Don't worry folks I'm in therapy for all this now)

But this post isn't really about me, it's about the "Strict" Father Model of the Conservatives, and about "contamination" by the Shadow. A strong case can be made that the Strict Father Model accepted by the Conservatives is indeed a "Dark" Father Model. A Father figure overcome by an "unintegrated" Shadow. The symptoms would be;

A hatred of any show of weakness. IE...emotional needs, dependancy, admitting mistakes, Medicare..etc.

A rejection of the equality of the "Feminine". IE...compassion, unconditional love, nurturance..etc.

A disdain for interdependence. IE..."it takes a village", communitarian values, Racial Tolerance, Social Security..etc.

A particular hatred/fear for/of (Male)Homosexuals.

A "Light" Father Model is what we as Progressives need to put up against the "Dark" Father figure of the Conservatives. To some degree the "Nurturant Parent" Model is a step in that direction, BUT the Model does NOT define the Masculine aspects sufficiently to "Challenge" the "Dark" Father Model. Robert Bly in his book "Iron John" discusses this subject in depth. IE... before a "Nurturant Parent" Model will be acceptable by the majority of MALES, a FULLY defined and satisfyingly deep, strong Maleness must be developed and revealed.

A Male who has been "feminized" is perceieved as a "Soft" Male, according to Bly. He insists that the male MUST go on an inner journey to discover his core masculinity BEFORE he can safely integrate his "feminine" side. To do otherwise is to "put the cart before the horse" and will be unconsciously rejected by the male psyche.

I will go farther with this if anyone is interested, but I have to go right now (I'm having a busy day). I'll check back later."

[DWB04]

We ALL do this to a greater or lesser degree! I do it! In fact, Picadilly, Indianhead, Heart, and Tomhye could reasonably make a case that that's what I've just been doing in the previous posts! Perhaps this is true. But alot of the worst effects of a "Shadow Accident" are ameliorated by OWNING ones' own shadow, thereby integrating it back into ones conscious mind in a healthy way. (Don't worry folks I'm in therapy for all this now)

But this post isn't really about me, it's about the "Strict" Father Model of the Conservatives, and about "contamination" by the Shadow. A strong case can be made that the Strict Father Model accepted by the Conservatives is indeed a "Dark" Father Model. A Father figure overcome by an "unintegrated" Shadow. The symptoms would be;

and I could equally make a case that they do not understand your experience....
there may be strength in numbers but it does not imply accuracy....

the best thing is to be true to what you know, not what others think they know......


now, I'll consider the other things you've said in light of understanding ourselves.
I think you already know that I find it extremely pleasant to see a man holding his children......for me it is not only the tenderness of that act, but it is a reasurring act of a more civilized man.

[TheRestofUs]

and I could equally make a case that they do not understand your experience....
there may be strength in numbers but it does not imply accuracy....

the best thing is to be true to what you know, not what others think they know......
now, I'll consider the other things you've said in light of understanding ourselves.
I think you already know that I find it extremely pleasant to see a man holding his children......for me it is not only the tenderness of that act, but it is a reasurring act of a more civilized man.

Thanks again for your emotional understanding. You exhibit the best in "Feminine Energy", and I as a Male appreciate it!

As to your attraction to a male who shows tenderness (holding his children)! You must know, that I am NOT talking about this as any kind of a negative. A daughter NEEDS a father to treat her this way, so she can grow up as a healthy young woman, and pick a likewise good man for a mate.

A son needs a father to likewise BLESS him, with a masculine show of love for the son, so he can become a MAN, like his father.

What I am saying is that the MAN, in order to DO these things, needs to be a MAN in a DEEP and somewhat mysterious way (not just biologically). In order to "attract" you, he needs to radiate "Masculine Energy"! This comes from within. THEN the picture of his exhibiting tenderness becomes an ephiphany! Robert Bly delves into this thoroughly.

As to the metaphors of the Democratic and Republican party; these need to be looked at as a Macrocosmic reflection of the microcosmic individual. The "Archtype" that is symbolized by the "Strict Father" Model accepted by the Conservatives is a "Father Energy" that has been damaged by modern society ( there are many reasons for this and Bly examines them)! Therefore it is contaminated with Shadow.

The Progressive movement needs to resurrect a "redeemed" "Father Energy", not a purely feminized, one. The redeemed Father is just as "strong if not stronger " than the damaged Father. He can then as a fully integrated MALE, attract the male populous as a HEALTHY role model.

This post has been edited by TheRestofUs: Mar 3 2005, 10:18 AM

[DWB04]

Thanks again for your emotional understanding. You exhibit the best in "Feminine Energy", and I as a Male appreciate it!

As to your attraction to a male who shows tenderness (holding his children)! You must know, that I am NOT talking about this as any kind of a negative. A daughter NEEDS a father to treat her this way, so she can grow up as a healthy young woman, and pick a likewise good man for a mate.

A son needs a father to likewise BLESS him, with a masculine show of love for the son, so he can become a MAN, like his father.

What I am saying is that the MAN, in order to DO these things, needs to be a MAN in a DEEP and somewhat mysterious way (not just biologically). In order to "attract" you, he needs to radiate "Masculine Energy"! This comes from within. THEN the picture of his exhibiting tenderness becomes an ephiphany! Robert Bly delves into this thoroughly.

As to the metaphors of the Democratic and Republican party; these need to be looked at as a Macrocosmic reflection of the microcosmic individual. The "Archtype" that is symbolized by the "Strict Father" Model accepted by the Conservatives is a "Father Energy" that has been damaged by modern society ( there are many reasons for this and Bly examines them)! Therefore it is contaminated with Shadow.

The Progressive movement needs to resurrect a "redeemed" "Father Energy", not a purely feminized, one. The redeemed Father is just as "strong if not stronger " than the damaged Father. He can then as a fully integrated MALE, attract the male populous as a HEALTHY role model.

yes, I think we touched on this a bit with Roosevelt......until the thread got hijacked!!!

[Freedom4all]

Looks like this thread has taken an interesting direction... Jung, the "Shadow", "Father Energy"...

I remember reading from one of Jung's writings, where he said something about this "imbalance" between the masculine and feminine within the Christian religion.

What caught my attention was what he said about the Catholics vs. Protestants.

He said the Protestants reject the high standing that the Catholics give to the Mother Mary. Jung believed this was a mistake.

He said, although many of the Catholic countries have a long way to go before they "balance" with the feminine side of the human psyche, they do have a spiritual role model in Mary.

The Movie "The Passion of the Christ" had too much emphasis on blood and brutality for many viewers, but I think the woman who played the part of Mary should have won an Oscar for her portrayal of love and strength.

If a person can get past the "hierarchy" of "interpreters", and read the words of Jesus without the filter of organized religion... Jesus is the "Light" Father figure, a balance of sensitivity and strength.

[DWB04]

Looks like this thread has taken an interesting direction... Jung, the "Shadow", "Father Energy"...

He said the Protestants reject the high standing that the Catholics give to the Mother Mary.  Jung believed this was a mistake.

He said, although many of the Catholic countries have a long way to go before they "balance" with the feminine side of the human psyche, they do have a spiritual role model in Mary.

If you look at Catholic history they didn't always revere the feminine...influences by both Judeo and Christian beliefs were more paternalistic especially as evidenced and practiced by the churches (Roman Catholic male dominated hierarchy), even if some early Christians did evidence a balance between male and female. It was much later that the Catholic church elevated Mary to a position of esteem in order to salvage the church, and introduce in a small way feminine influence.

Today we see the same with some proponents trying to elevate the Magdalene...from her sorry position as a whore, to an equal disciple...these proponents would like to see women have the ability to hold higher stations within the church hierarchy.......and of course we know that the Catholic church objects to this.

[DWB04]

Looks like this thread has taken an interesting direction... Jung, the "Shadow", "Father Energy"...

In fact I posted a bit of information in another thread regarding the migration of European peoples...if this is studied, you can see that as hordes from the North who had a more paternalistic structure to their society invaded and subdued their Southern cousins who had a more maternalistic structure to their society that this became the structure of European society. When one also adds the paternalistic Judeo-Christian belief systems (as evidenced by church hierarchy), you can see how Western civilization became more paternalistic than some of its Eastern counterparts.

This post has been edited by DWB04: Mar 3 2005, 01:46 PM

[Freedom4all]

In fact I posted a bit of information in another thread regarding the migration of European peoples...if this is studied, you can see that as hordes from the North who had a more paternalistic structure to their society invaded and subdued their Southern cousins who had a more maternalistic structure to their society that this became the structure of European society. When one also adds the paternalistic Judeo-Christian belief systems (as evidenced by church hierarchy), you can see how Western civilization became more paternalistic than some of its Eastern counterparts.

Jung also spent time in Asia to learn their language and culture. He observed that the western idea of "romance" (desperate infatuation) is not found in Asia (although maybe now, via exported Hollywood movies). The developed Asian cultures found in china, Japan and Korea seem to have an understanding of the duality they call Yin and Yang.

"If Yang is overly powerful, then Yin may be too weak. If Yin is particularly strong, then Yang is apt to be defective. If the male force is overwhelming, then there will be excessive heat. If the female force is overwhelming, then there will be excessive cold."

[DWB04]

Jung also spent time in Asia to learn their language and culture. He observed that the western idea of "romance" (desperate infatuation) is not found in Asia (although maybe now, via exported Hollywood movies).  The developed Asian cultures found in china, Japan and Korea seem to have an understanding of the duality they call Yin and Yang.

"If Yang is overly powerful, then Yin may be too weak. If Yin is particularly strong, then Yang is apt to be defective. If the male force is overwhelming, then there will be excessive heat. If the female force is overwhelming, then there will be excessive cold."

Right as with Joseph Campbell, and the myths that he studied, you can also see the influence of romantic courtly love in European literature.....I studied Arthurian Romance in literature courses.....if you follow that, you can then also see the Romantic poetry of Byron, Keats, and Shelley etc..... this is an attempt I believe to do the same as the church did (in essence), and that is elevate the feminine because we had such a male dominated society........and thank goodness at least for these men...!!

whereas as you say Eastern cultures exhibit more of a balance....and I think that comes from an entirely different philosophic basis.

This post has been edited by DWB04: Mar 3 2005, 04:24 PM

[rla]

The Social Learning Theory of
Julian B. Rotter

The main idea in Julian Rotter's Social Learning Theory is that personality represents an interaction of the individual with his or her environment. One cannot speak of a personality, internal to the individual, that is independent of the environment. Neither can one focus on behavior as being an automatic response to an objective set of environmental stimuli. Rather, to understand behavior, one must take both the individual (i.e., his or her life history of learning and experiences) and the environment (i.e., those stimuli that the person is aware of and responding to) into account. Rotter describes personality as a relatively stable set of potentials for responding to situations in a particular way.

Psychopathology and Treatment. Rotter is very opposed to the medical model conception of mental disorders as being diseases or illnesses. Rather, he conceives of psychological problems as maladaptive behavior brought about by faulty or inadequate learning experiences. For Rotter, the symptoms of pathology, like all behavior, are learned. Therefore, treatment should be considered a learning situation where adaptive behaviors and cognitions are taught, and the therapist-client relationship is viewed as being similar to a teacher-student relationship. Much of current cognitive-behavioral treatment has its roots in Rotter's social learning theory, although these debts often go unacknowledged.

http://psych.fullerton.edu/jmearns/rotter.htm
some interesting information regarding learning deficits.....

http://www.pediatricneurology.com/autism.h...stic%20Disorder
Listen to children with Aspergers syndrome

http://www.pediatricneurology.com/aspergers_sound.htm
Interventional Therapy in learning and development for children

http://www.childmdim.com/resources/interve...t_practices.asp
Social and Emotional Development

http://classweb.gmu.edu/awinsler/ordp/social.html#temp
Of interest....Social Theorists.......you might like this site Bill

http://www.trinity.edu/~mkearl/theory.html

According to Karl Popper (Logik der Forschung, 1935: p.26), Theory is "the net which we throw out in order to catch the world--to rationalize, explain, and dominate it." Through history, sociological theory arose out of attempts to make sense of times of dramatic social change. As Hans Gerth and C. Wright Mills observed in Character and Social Structure (Harbinger Books, 1964:xiii), "Problems of the nature of human nature are raised most urgently when the life-routines of a society are disturbed, when men are alienated from their social roles in such a way as to open themselves up for new insight."

DWB04,
I think your introduction of Rotter's work was very additive to the discussion. His
contribution was most profound. It integrated the two major historical trends of
psycholanalytic theory and Behaviorism and made a place for the role of cognition
which laid the groundwork for the next major advance of information processing models of human behavior. One branch of this orientation became what is now refered to as artificial intelligence which normdoering has introduced into
this discussion. Rotter's work was also influential on the development of a Life Skills approach to counseling and psychotherapy that I have spoken of previously.The central question still is,"What is the nature of human nature?" How
do human development, human behavior and human experience work and how
can we improve on this process?

This post has been edited by rla: Mar 3 2005, 05:30 PM

[DWB04]

DWB04,
I think your introduction of Rotter's work was very additive to the discussion. His
contribution was most profound. It integrated the two major historical trends of
psycholanalytic theory and Behaviorism and made a place for the role of cognition
which laid the groundwork for the next major advance of information processing models of human behavior. One branch of this orientation became what is now refered to as artificial intelligence which normdoering has introduced into
this discussion. Rotter's work was also influential on the development of a Life Skills approach to counseling and psychotherapy that I have spoken of previously.The central question still is,"What is the nature of human nature?" How
do human development, human behavior and human experience work and how
can we improve on this process?

Thanks Robert for connecting the two, I was unaware of that significance, I simply found Rotter's writing profound in itself....

I have my questions as well......
and that relates to the big question of Qualia......the connection between brain and mind.....the currently unaswered question

when I look at all we have talked about, I see on the one hand with our human understanding this final question..."qualia" what is it?????

and when I look at the universe and what we are seeking to understand I see this same unanswered question.......perhaps this is why i see a link between the two........maybe when we answer one we will have the other answer???????

[TheRestofUs]

Until we as Progressives can fully understand and actualize this. We are fighting an uphill battle( politically and culturally). There is a deep hunger (among men) for the "Father Energy" in this disempowering modern society. This is why Males will opt for even a Dark Father Energy if it is all that is offered. This is why we progressives lose fights we should win on the merits.

Likewise with the fight to keep Science purely Science. The Dark Father Model does not want a Scientific refutation of HIS authority. Facts that contradict his judgements are NOT welcome. Therefore such facts and their source must be co-opted.

It is no coincidence that the symptoms of thinking among fundamentalists fit the analysis of the Dark Father Metaphor.

No individual, not even Bush or Cheney is purely the Dark Father. They are pushing the symbolic agenda of one, wittingly or unwittingly to a significant degree, because it wins them POWER!

The newly empowered "Feminine Energy" (the rise of the Empress), is not ascendent enough yet to take on the Dark Father alone. It behoves progressive women to encourage not discourage men to take this inner journey and find "Iron John"!

[rla]

Thanks Robert for connecting the two, I was unaware of that significance, I simply found Rotter's writing profound in itself....

I have my questions as well......
and that relates to the big question of Qualia......the connection between brain and mind.....the currently unaswered question

when I look at all we have talked about, I see on the one hand with our human understanding this final question..."qualia" what is it????? 

and when I look at the universe and what we are seeking to understand I see this same unanswered question.......perhaps this is why i see a link between the two........maybe when we answer one we will have the other answer???????

While everything that is, is not yet known, I believe that it is knowable.The relationship between brain and mind has always always interested me as far back as I can remember. While there's obviously an awfull lot of brain function involved in mind it always seemed to me to involve something that went beyond brain function. As I developed a fuller meaning for the concept of system and of the concept of self I stopped using the concept of mind and I never had
much use for the concept of soul. The Self-system, that ongoing process of
contact between the organism and the environment, includes what we've always meant by brain and mind. The brain as a major component of the organism and of
the self system is somewhat analogus to the central processing unit of a computer system. The "isness" of existence reflects the interplay between the structure and
process of systems. Every process transforms a structure and leaves a record in
the form of a structure. One of the best ways to learn more about human beings
is to learn everything that human beings have ever learned about systems.

This post has been edited by rla: Mar 4 2005, 05:21 PM

[DWB04]

While everything that is, is not yet known, I believe that it is knowableThe relationship between brain and mind has always always interested me as far back as I can remember. .

I'd love to carry this discussion on Robert.....it is quite fascinating to me as well.....I remember years ago reading The Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind by Julian Jaynes....that got me started I think.....

[underbear1]

Feminine Energy is a good thing, but Dark Father and his hunky fallen angel will sell more DVDs

[rla]

I didn't realize that this thread was still open. My lack of computer literacy is a
real handicap. I would like to get back to the relation between brain and
mind . I think general system theory could be helpful in this regard. I would like to get more of your thinking.