[MD] Psychology and Philosophy

[118]

Heh, heh, I had to expect from the peanut gallery of the frustrated.
(yes, dmb, get laid sometime).

So dmb, let me see if I have this right. You say that my issue with
psychology is psychological.  You also claim that philosophy is
psychological.  Hmmmm... I am beginning to get this.  And you say that
my issue with psychology is personal, and also that philosophy is
personal.  Good... it is beginning to fit.  And you state that I had a
personal encounter with psychology which you then state is an
accounting of the psyche.  And that such accounting produces
philosophy.  Well, yes... I do see what you are saying, by Jove!  But,
dmb, may I ask what is your point?  You have simply just described me
as a philosopher.  Or, are you trying to make a different point about
both me and philosophers?

I have no need to defend insanity, I AM insane and I love it!  Pity
goes out to ye sleeping SOMists, hope you find what you are looking
for, it ain't too far away. HAHAHAHAHA!!!  Time for another
rump-biting session!  I call it the Willy James' Butt Crack Snack with
crusty Deweydrops served au-pragmatal.  YEEAGH-HAA!  TASTY!

Insanely yours,
Mark


On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 7:44 PM, david buchanan <dmbuchanan at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> pirsigaffliction said to Mark:
> My suspicion, which puts us at odds, is that you have a reductionist view of the discipline of psychology, one that only focuses on reductionists.  But I don't know.  ...The problems you want to talk about seem to me much more discussable only when we don't talk at such an abstract level as you do.  But I'm likely in the minority here, as Pirsig does discuss these problems at that level of abstraction.  But either way, your conditional claim that "the intent of psychology to 'understand' the mind through rigorous data collection" doesn't seem right to me as history or conceptual substance. ...
>
>
> dmb says:
> My suspicion is that Mark's problem with psychology is personal, not philosophical. I suspect Mark is here largely because he is sympathetic with Pirsig's criticisms of psychiatry and/or Pirsig's defense of insanity as a kind of adjustment period. It's between the lines, but the man is complaining about his own personal encounter with psychology.
>
> psyche * logos = psych * ology = an account of the psyche
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org/md/archives.html