Thank You Letter to a Rational Scientist

Page 1 of 1 [ 10 posts ] 

johnpipe108
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

User avatar

Joined: 11 Dec 2007
Age: 79
Gender: Male
Posts: 227
Location: Santa Rosa, CA, USA

19 Dec 2007, 3:59 pm

Some years ago, a scientist of my acquaintance was speaking on science, and spoke of "the austerity of science" (the rules by which science plays). He did not go into an intellectual explanation of these rules, but I had an intuitive sense of his meaning.

That fine gentleman has long since left this mortal coil, and not so long ago I had come across the web page of a rational scientist, who gave a very clear explanation of this austerity, along with a caution that the field of psychology doesn't play strictly by those same rules.

I composed the "thank you" note below in a certain style, as I seem to be better at expressing my feelings in a humorous manner than in an intellectual & artistic one.

Here it is:

Quote:
Aspergers Syndrome and the Reality of Psychology

Dear Paul, I'm a 63 year old Electrical Engineering Tech, retired on SSDI (due to increased memory lapse), who has recently had the interesting and liberating experience of discovering he is not a "stranger in a strange land", but a member of the "long lost tribe of Aspie", i.e., my particular flavor of the human variety is seen as "odd" by the shaman's of a much larger neighboring tribe called "Enties", who like to characterize us as having what they call "Aspergers Syndrome" (when they are feeling somewhat friendly) or "Aspergers Disorder" (when they are not).

Now, this wouldn't cause so much trouble if it wasn't for the fact that some of their shamans, which call themselves "Psychologists", are under a delusion that they are "scientists" and have managed to convince most of their tribe of this delusion. However, thanks to the intelligence that you have passed on to us about them, we are able to properly classify them as "artists".

Now, some of their artists seem to be fine artists, but some seem only to be con artists. It's this last group that really worry us; you see, many of this group seem not only irrational, but are not infrequently openly hostile towards members of our tribe.

We find their behavior puzzling; after all, we've always been friendly to their tribe, despite their peculiarly superstitious nature. You see, unlike ourselves, their tribe doesn't seem to have a natural ability to think outside the box, so we had to teach them how to do so. Unfortunately, as you have observed, they have forgotten the purpose of their educational institutions, which we helped them to create.

We can only conclude that perhaps these particular shamans have an irrational fear that we will infect their people, and that our ways will undermine their religion.

Our greatest fear, of course, is that the apparently growing ignorance of their tribe is putting it in danger of extinction; this would, of course be the worst possible disaster, as our tribe is very small and theirs is very large, and we need them for survival as much as they need us.

Now, if only we could get them to understand this!

Thanks for the heads up

Johnpipe


_________________
He who sees all beings in the Self, and the Self in all beings, hates none -- Isha Upanishad

Bom Shankar Bholenath! I do not "have a syndrome", nor do I "have a disorder," I am a "Natural Born Scholar!"


monty
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Sep 2007
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,741

19 Dec 2007, 4:44 pm

Most psychologists (and doctors) are not scientists - they are clinicians. They have some training in science, but they are not pushing the boundaries of knowledge. They diagnose and suggest various therapies. Sometimes they misdiagnose. Sometimes they get notions in their head which may not be in agreement with objective truth, and they cling to these notions.

This does not mean that there is not scientific psychology. There is. Most published articles involve designing experiments, gathering data, and analyzing it in scientific manner.



singularitymadam
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

User avatar

Joined: 24 Aug 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Female
Posts: 213
Location: I live in a Mad Max movie. It's not as fun as it sounds.

19 Dec 2007, 5:26 pm

monty wrote:
Sometimes they misdiagnose. Sometimes they get notions in their head which may not be in agreement with objective truth, and they cling to these notions.


Sorry to be nitpicky, but there is no "objective" truth in psychology until we fully understand the workings of the human mind. This is my goal in life, and the people working on The Blue Brain Project are my heroes.



logitechdog
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Nov 2006
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 973
Location: Uk - Thornaby

19 Dec 2007, 5:48 pm

Agree with the last female they made a huge mistake with the Y chromosome until 60 scientists got together & mapped it...



lelia
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Apr 2007
Age: 72
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,897
Location: Vancouver not BC, Washington not DC

19 Dec 2007, 6:01 pm

I truly enjoyed your letter. I hope the scientist does too.



monty
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Sep 2007
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,741

19 Dec 2007, 6:08 pm

singularitymadam wrote:
monty wrote:
Sometimes they misdiagnose. Sometimes they get notions in their head which may not be in agreement with objective truth, and they cling to these notions.


Sorry to be nitpicky, but there is no "objective" truth in psychology until we fully understand the workings of the human mind. This is my goal in life, and the people working on The Blue Brain Project are my heroes.


Not at all true. For example, the study of optical illusions can tell us something about how the human mind processes and interprets information. We can look at different brainwave states that correspond to different activities, and learn about the mind/brain from that. We can do experiments to measure short term memory and consolidation. We can investigate subliminal perception. etc. etc.

You have it all backwards. We cannot possibly understand the human mind unless we start by discovering smaller truths, and then put these together. And even that may not fully explain the mind. But it is the only real approach - to say that we can't know anything until we know everything is wrong.



singularitymadam
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

User avatar

Joined: 24 Aug 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Female
Posts: 213
Location: I live in a Mad Max movie. It's not as fun as it sounds.

19 Dec 2007, 6:14 pm

johnpipe, I'm sorry we seem to be hijacking your thread. I really enjoyed your letter.

monty wrote:
Not at all true. For example, the study of optical illusions can tell us something about how the human mind processes and interprets information. We can look at different brainwave states that correspond to different activities, and learn about the mind/brain from that. We can do experiments to measure short term memory and consolidation. We can investigate subliminal perception. etc. etc.

You have it all backwards. We cannot possibly understand the human mind unless we start by discovering smaller truths, and then put these together. And even that may not fully explain the mind. But it is the only real approach - to say that we can't know anything until we know everything is wrong.


You have a good point, and I agree with putting the smaller pieces together (it's the only way we can know things for now). But basing a clinical diagnosis--and an entire field of thought--on partial knowledge just doesn't work for me. I know people need help while science figures this out, but I simply don't agree with the way it is currently done: as more of an art than anything empirical.



IronicChef
Supporting Member
Supporting Member

User avatar

Joined: 6 Nov 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 76
Location: Blame Canada!

19 Dec 2007, 8:46 pm

Science always begins with a sort of reverse-engineering approach. We experience a phenomenon - "Why do things fall?" - and we look for the process that causes it. This results in a model that we can use to predict subsequent phenomenon - Newton's theory of gravity for example.

All of science is at a constant state of refinement, and there's a reason that scientists don't call things "laws" any more. For a long time, folks referred to Newton's notion of gravity as a law, until some chap named Einstein came along with his Theory of Relativity and showed that, while Newton's model was a good predictive tool, that it didn't accurately describe subtler qualities of gravity.

While we are still living in primitive times in terms of our understanding of medicine and mind, it is unfair to suggest that medical researchers are not scientists. The application of scientific method defines a scientist. It is certainly fair to call a General Practitioner, Psychologist or Psychiatrist a clinician - they are the artisans who put the body of scientific knowledge to practice, but their work is limited to what they learn from the scientists and their own personal competence.

Some day, we will achieve medical knowledge that parallels our current understanding of physics and chemistry, but we're still a long way from there. In the meanwhile, we have to accept that most doctors are trying to do the best they can with the theories they have to work with, and the best doctors stay ever vigilant for new theories that can help their patients.

Nick



johnpipe108
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

User avatar

Joined: 11 Dec 2007
Age: 79
Gender: Male
Posts: 227
Location: Santa Rosa, CA, USA

19 Dec 2007, 10:59 pm

singularitymadam wrote:
johnpipe, I'm sorry we seem to be hijacking your thread. I really enjoyed your letter.



No Problemo, and I'm really glad you enjoyed it. I also posted to my shivakalpa/sivakalpa yahoo groups, and one of my old friends on that list replied :

Quote:
Hi John, Very funny. I'm going to copy and pass it on to two spots, one a psychologist who is a very dear friend and he'll laugh and the other a court appointed therapy business who are badgering and belittling my nephew. Thanks, glad the flow has caught you.

.

Everyones feelings are welcome in my threads.

With love ...


_________________
He who sees all beings in the Self, and the Self in all beings, hates none -- Isha Upanishad

Bom Shankar Bholenath! I do not "have a syndrome", nor do I "have a disorder," I am a "Natural Born Scholar!"


johnpipe108
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

User avatar

Joined: 11 Dec 2007
Age: 79
Gender: Male
Posts: 227
Location: Santa Rosa, CA, USA

19 Dec 2007, 11:15 pm

singularitymadam wrote:

Sorry to be nitpicky, but there is no "objective" truth in psychology until we fully understand the workings of the human mind.


You do, of course understand, that this process will take the next several million years ... :wink:


_________________
He who sees all beings in the Self, and the Self in all beings, hates none -- Isha Upanishad

Bom Shankar Bholenath! I do not "have a syndrome", nor do I "have a disorder," I am a "Natural Born Scholar!"