I've been wanting to do this for quite a while now, and avoiding it because it is a significant task that I have set before myself -- specifically, re-doing my Honours Thesis in Psychology which that I wrote almost 30 years ago.
The essay was primarily a work on language, epistemology, values, and health -- specifically, showing how the first three factors affected -- even largely determined -- the outcome of the fourth factor, mental, emotional, psychological, and physical -- health.
At the same time, my honours thesis was my first or second major swing at what today I am calling 'Hegel's Hotel' and/or 'DGB Philosophy'. In the 1980's, I called it 'Gap Psychology' as I learned and integrated important elements of Gestalt Therapy, Adlerian Psychology, Psychoanalysis, Jungian Psychology, and Transactional Analysis. In the 1990a I started calling it 'Gap Philosophy' or 'Gap Philosophy-Psychology' as I took Gap Psychology into the realm of philosophy and started studying the various philosophers that I viewed as relevant to my evolving work.
In the 1990s, I started calling my work 'DGB Philosophy' or 'DGB Philosophy-Psychology' which still covertly retained part of the names of 'Gap Psychology' and 'Gap Philosophy' because the initials 'DGB', as well being the initials of my name, were also an anacronym for 'Dialectical-Gap-Bridging' Philosophy-Psychology. At one point in my writing, which will see in some of my essays, I even started calling it 'DGBN' Philosophy which stood for 'Dialectical-Gap-Bridging-Negotiations'.
But Hegel's Hotel and DGB Philosophy all started with this present-day rendition of my original Honours Thesis back in 1979 called 'Evaluation and Health'.
Looking back at it now, I see the work as having been very dry, stale, and mechancial -- I was trying to treat human epistemology and evaluation as an 'objective science' which it partly should be treated as an objective science -- just like what is supposed to happen in a court of law, and/or, for those of you who might be able to remember this far back, like in those old 'FBI' television shows (the 60s, 70s, maybe?) where the one detective would always say something to the extent of: 'Just the facts, ma'am, just the facts.' The essay was kind of like science was during the 'Enlightenment Period' of the late 1700s and early 1800s before Nietzsche arrived on the scene and came at the apparently indestructible 'objective arrogancy' of Science and pulverized it with his philosophical wrecking ball -- which building on the work of Schopenhauer -- showed the world just how much every aspect of man's life -- his thinking, his feeling, his actions, and every aspect of his culture including religion and science -- is subjectively biased by by what Freud would later call 'human narcissism'.
That philosophical picture hasn't changed today. We cannot properly approach the study of epistemology without fully realizing that there is a world of difference separatedd by a major 'gap', 'chasm' or 'abys' between what we might want to call 'ideal human epistemology' ('Just the facts, ma'am, just the facts.') and 'applied human epistemology' which quickly and quietly gets bent out of shape by the dominating influence and force of human narcissism and the resulting subjectivism and bias. One only has to listen to a 'he said, she said' argument to realize that 'ideal objective epistemology' has just been blown out the door.
It is becoming increasingly apparent to me by the moment that this network of essays to follow on 'Epistemology, Evaluation, Action, and Health' is going to involve a huge re-making, modification and extrapolation of what I originally wrote in 1979. I cannot copy the old thesis, word for word, because I am no longer there. I have to take that old, dry, mechanical thesis and turn it into something more 'human', more interesting, and more relevant to Hegel's Hotel: DGB Philosophy-Psychology today as it is currently evolving in 2008. And to do that we will start our re-make of this work with a discussion on rationality and irrationality in man.
-- dgb, April 6th, 2008.
Friday, April 11, 2008
Rationality and Irrationality in Man
When I was coming to the end of my Honours Thesis in Psychology in 1979, the subject of energy and motivation was just starting to come up as I was winding down. I knew that there was a whole new world that I had to investigate in terms of man's psychology because man is not an 'automaton' or a 'machine' or a 'computer' -- even though in some ways man's mind certainly does function like a computer, or rather visa versa.
The computer operates much like man's brain with a 'processor', 'memory', and so on...But man is not a computer -- he doesn't always think rationally and logically and objectively like a computer -- rather, he is subject to massive motivational and emotional influences and biases that can easily stray him from the path of 'objective epistemology'. My work back in 1979 was largely a work aimed at teaching 'objective epistemology' (even though the word 'epistemology' hadn't really entered my vocabulary and thought process yet. I was studying psychology, not philosophy even though the two I was to find out later are intimately connected to each other and cannot really be talked about 'wholistically' except in the way that they have influenced each other, or primarily that philosophy stimulated the birth of psychology as a more specialized realm of philosophy).
I was an 'Enlightenment' student of philosophy and psychology back in 1979 which means that in my writing I was basically functioning from the neck up. Yes, I knew about man's capability for 'irrationality' but back in 1979 it was all about 'teaching people to be different -- teaching people to be more 'rational' and 'logical'. The writers I was primarily influenced by were 'General Semantic' and 'cognitive' writers like Alfred Korzybski, S.I. Hayakawa, Albert Ellis, Nataniel Branden, Aaron Beck, combined with the beginnings of a 'humanistic-existential' influence in the writings of Erich Fromm.
It was easy -- or so I thought -- I was simply going to teach people the lessons and skills of 'General Semantics' and 'Cognitive Therapy' -- and the whole world was going to be a better place for my having taught these lessons and skills.
Not. I was an idealistic university student. What did I know about living in the world of 'reality' -- of trying to make a living, and keeping up with my bills, and raising two kids and dealing with 'emotional-passionate' women. Trying to 'teach' cognitive therapy and General Semantics to either of my two earliest girlfriends in the throes of a 'passionate' and 'irrational' argument was like trying to funnel an ocean backwards into a river. There was a lot of 'emotional spillage and chaos' where 'rationality', 'logic' and 'Enlightenment Philosophy' just did/do not carry the day. After the experiences with my first girlfriend, I didn't even try to teach General Semantics or Cognitve Therapy to any girlfriend after that -- especially in the throes of an argument. It was dangerous. Something more was needed to better understand the full extent of man's propensity for 'narcissistic bias and subjectivity'.
Men and women simply do not function solely from the 'neck up'.
Welcome to the world of Schopenhauer, and Kierkegaard, and Doestevsky, and Nietzsche, and Freud, and Jung, and Perls...(although Perls did add a Korzybski-General Semantic influence to Gestalt Therapy). Welcome to man's 'ocean of irrationality trying to fit within the banks of a river of rationality'. Schopenhauer called man's huge propensity for irrationality and narcissistic bias 'the deterministic will of the universe'. Kierkegaard called it man's 'Aesthetic' influence. Nietzsche called it man's 'Dionysian' influence. Freud called it the 'id'. Jung called it 'the shadow'. Perls called it 'the underdog'.
One could argue that even in the heart of darkness -- even in man's most seeminlgy 'irrational' moments -- that 'reason' and 'logic' is still prevailing. But reason and logic are dancing to the tune of a 'different God'. Reason and logic have tuned out 'Apollo' (in ancient Greek mythology, God of 'ethics', 'morality', 'law' and 'order') and tuned in 'Dionysus' (the ancient Greek God of 'dance, celebration, and hedonistic pleasure). Or you could say that man in the throes of irrationality is still following 'logic' and 'reason' but dancing to the tune of 'Narcissus' (the God of self-interest/self-absorption).
What I am starting to show here -- and to be sure, this is me writing in 2008, not 1979 -- is that there is a very useful connection between the study of ancient mythology (for me so far, mainly Greek mythology), and the study of present day philosophy and psychology. In a similar regard, what I am also starting to show here is the connection between 'energy centres', 'value priorities', 'motivational bias' and epistemology.
There is a huge gap -- once again a chasm or an abyss -- between 'objective, idealistic, Enlightenment epistemology' and 'realistic, motivationally biased epistemology'. Applied human epistemology does not occur in an emotional vacuum. It occurs in a context and a backdrop of different types of human motivational subjectivity. Trying to change a person's epistemology -- or 'style' of epistemology -- without getting to roots of his or her subjective motivational energy centre and bias -- is like trying to get rid of dandelions by pulling out the stems without digging out the roots as well. Without digging out the roots of a dandelion, the dandelion is just going to grow another flower and stem.
Trying to teach rational, objective, Enlightenment epistemology is not going to be very useful or fruitful unless or until you are sure that the person you are working with is dancing to the tune of Apollo and not Dionysus or 'Aprhrodite' (Goddess of love and romance), 'Aries' (God of war) or any of a host of other possible 'energy-centred Gods'.
Carl Jung went much deeper into this subject area than I will ever go. There are two ways of looking at a 'myth': one way is to look at a myth as an 'objective, epistemological falsity'; the second way to look at a myth is as a 'human subjective, motivational truth'. We are more interested in the second way of looking at myths in this context here.
But there is an even larger picture here. What I'm trying to do now -- which I didn't do back in 1979 because I couldn't, I didn't have the knowledge -- is to put the study of epistemology, or at least DGB Epistemology, into the larger context of 'Hegel's Hotel' as an entirely integrated network of 'sub-works'. In this regard, epistemology is not only a division of philosophy but it is also indirectly a division of psychology as well. For example, in Psychoanalysis, the study of epistemology might indirectly be incorporated into the study of 'ego-functioning' or 'Central-Ego-Functioning'.
If 'ego' means basically 'self', then 'ego-functioning' can be defined as all the different functions of the self. 'Epistemology' is one such function -- or actually, a number of 'inter-connected sub-functions' like 'sensory perception', 'association', 'distinction', and 'logical (or illogical) deduction and interpretation', 'feedback'...which I am all including under the name of 'central-ego-functioning'. This was mainly what my 1979 essay -- 'Evaluation and Health' was all about.
However, there are other 'ego-functions' other than 'epistemology' and 'central-ego-functioning. As well, epistemology is not the only function of the 'Central Ego'. 'Conflict-mediation', 'evaluation', 'response-choosing', 'consequence-interpreting', 'and 'executive action' -- within a 'DGB Philosophy-Psychology' mindset' -- are five other related sub-functions of 'The Central Ego'. The Central Ego is a metaphysical concept used to help breakdown and better comprehend all the different sub-functions of the 'Self' -- or 'Ego' -- or 'I'. I am my 'Central Ego' and my 'Central Ego' is me. But there are other 'periphery' or 'subsidery' functions of the Ego that are also worth naming, describing, and better understanding. These can be analogized to the 'Parliament', 'Senate', or 'Congress' in a 'State's' political activities relative to the 'President's Office', the 'Prime Minister's Office' -- or in business, the 'CEO's office'. All of these other names that can and will be discussed here in Hegel's Hotel: DGB Philosophy-Psychology are 'metaphysical concepts' used to help understand all the various 'sub-functions' relative to the philosophy, the psychology, and the executive action of the entire 'Ego', 'Self', or 'I'
You see, everything that man thinks and feels and does is 'projected outward into culture' -- politics, religion, mythology, art, music, sports, business, family, medicine, architecture, philosophy, psychology...
Religion is mythology and mythology is religion -- and both are a particular type of 'energy centre' dealing with a particular set of ego-functions and sub-functions that all can be equated to a particular type or brand of 'philosophy-psychology'.
Each part is connected to -- and plays a vital role in the overall functioning of -- the whole -- the Self, the Ego, or the I. In turn, the Self, the Ego, or the I, has a vital 'multi-dialectical relationship' with the functioning of the body -- and all its different part-functions. But we are primarily concerned with 'philosophy-psychology here -- not biology, physics, and chemisry -- although here too, everthing is wholistically connected -- mind and body, subject and object, spirit, senses, and soul...
In Hegel's Hotel: DGB Philosophy-Psychology everything is wholistically connected -- philosophy-psychology-science-medicine-art-religion-mythology-business-sports-entertainment-hobbies...These are all 'outward projections and reflections of the internal workings of man's multi-dialectical-philosophy-psychology'. They are all different cultural expressions of the many different internal 'energy-centres' and 'subsidiary-ego-functions' that are wholistically connected to the 'central-ego-functioning' of The Self.
This is 'the wholistic context of man's entire philosophy-psychology' that I didn't have back in 1979 when I wrote 'Evaluation and Health'. 'Evaluation and Health' provided the epistemological and the humanistic-existential foundation which is now 'Hegel's Hotel: DGB Philosophy-Psychology'.
Epistemology is the pursuit of 'truth and knowledge' in human philosophy-psychology. 'Humanistic-Existentialism' is one particular perspective in the pusuit of 'value, meaning, and action' in human philosophy-psychology. 'Evaluation and Health' was the foundational starting-point for both of these branches in the study of philosophy-psychology as presented through 'Hegel's Hotel: DGB Philosophy-Psychology.
For those of you who are interested in the study of 'epistemology' -- and the part language and semantics plays in epistemology -- I invite you to focus on your 'Apollonian energy centre' as we begin to study the interplay between 'truth and ethics' in my 1979 essay: 'Evaluation and Health'. I'm expecting a lot from you here as we focus for a while on man's philosphy-psychology primarily from the 'neck up'. Then after this, we will step away from 'Apollo' for a while and visit other more entertaining and dramatic 'energy-ego-centres': 'Narcissus' (narcissism), 'Dionysus' (sensuality, pleasure, celebration, dancing, sex...), 'Aphrodite' and/or 'Eros' (romance, love, passion, nature..), 'Aries' (war, deconstructionism...), and more...
I probably just made the study of 'Apollo', 'epistemology', and 'ethics' sound so boring that you may want to 'jump ship' on me here in order to 'fast-forward' to some of these other mythological Gods and external projections of internal 'energy-ego-centres'.
Alas, there can be no truth, ethics, justice, peace and harmony on earth if we all ignore 'Apollo'. Apollo is important -- and so too are both 'epistemology' and 'ethics'...So please...follow Apollo...with me...through 'Evaluation and Health'...
dgb, April 8th, 2008; modified and expanded, April 11th, 2008.
The computer operates much like man's brain with a 'processor', 'memory', and so on...But man is not a computer -- he doesn't always think rationally and logically and objectively like a computer -- rather, he is subject to massive motivational and emotional influences and biases that can easily stray him from the path of 'objective epistemology'. My work back in 1979 was largely a work aimed at teaching 'objective epistemology' (even though the word 'epistemology' hadn't really entered my vocabulary and thought process yet. I was studying psychology, not philosophy even though the two I was to find out later are intimately connected to each other and cannot really be talked about 'wholistically' except in the way that they have influenced each other, or primarily that philosophy stimulated the birth of psychology as a more specialized realm of philosophy).
I was an 'Enlightenment' student of philosophy and psychology back in 1979 which means that in my writing I was basically functioning from the neck up. Yes, I knew about man's capability for 'irrationality' but back in 1979 it was all about 'teaching people to be different -- teaching people to be more 'rational' and 'logical'. The writers I was primarily influenced by were 'General Semantic' and 'cognitive' writers like Alfred Korzybski, S.I. Hayakawa, Albert Ellis, Nataniel Branden, Aaron Beck, combined with the beginnings of a 'humanistic-existential' influence in the writings of Erich Fromm.
It was easy -- or so I thought -- I was simply going to teach people the lessons and skills of 'General Semantics' and 'Cognitive Therapy' -- and the whole world was going to be a better place for my having taught these lessons and skills.
Not. I was an idealistic university student. What did I know about living in the world of 'reality' -- of trying to make a living, and keeping up with my bills, and raising two kids and dealing with 'emotional-passionate' women. Trying to 'teach' cognitive therapy and General Semantics to either of my two earliest girlfriends in the throes of a 'passionate' and 'irrational' argument was like trying to funnel an ocean backwards into a river. There was a lot of 'emotional spillage and chaos' where 'rationality', 'logic' and 'Enlightenment Philosophy' just did/do not carry the day. After the experiences with my first girlfriend, I didn't even try to teach General Semantics or Cognitve Therapy to any girlfriend after that -- especially in the throes of an argument. It was dangerous. Something more was needed to better understand the full extent of man's propensity for 'narcissistic bias and subjectivity'.
Men and women simply do not function solely from the 'neck up'.
Welcome to the world of Schopenhauer, and Kierkegaard, and Doestevsky, and Nietzsche, and Freud, and Jung, and Perls...(although Perls did add a Korzybski-General Semantic influence to Gestalt Therapy). Welcome to man's 'ocean of irrationality trying to fit within the banks of a river of rationality'. Schopenhauer called man's huge propensity for irrationality and narcissistic bias 'the deterministic will of the universe'. Kierkegaard called it man's 'Aesthetic' influence. Nietzsche called it man's 'Dionysian' influence. Freud called it the 'id'. Jung called it 'the shadow'. Perls called it 'the underdog'.
One could argue that even in the heart of darkness -- even in man's most seeminlgy 'irrational' moments -- that 'reason' and 'logic' is still prevailing. But reason and logic are dancing to the tune of a 'different God'. Reason and logic have tuned out 'Apollo' (in ancient Greek mythology, God of 'ethics', 'morality', 'law' and 'order') and tuned in 'Dionysus' (the ancient Greek God of 'dance, celebration, and hedonistic pleasure). Or you could say that man in the throes of irrationality is still following 'logic' and 'reason' but dancing to the tune of 'Narcissus' (the God of self-interest/self-absorption).
What I am starting to show here -- and to be sure, this is me writing in 2008, not 1979 -- is that there is a very useful connection between the study of ancient mythology (for me so far, mainly Greek mythology), and the study of present day philosophy and psychology. In a similar regard, what I am also starting to show here is the connection between 'energy centres', 'value priorities', 'motivational bias' and epistemology.
There is a huge gap -- once again a chasm or an abyss -- between 'objective, idealistic, Enlightenment epistemology' and 'realistic, motivationally biased epistemology'. Applied human epistemology does not occur in an emotional vacuum. It occurs in a context and a backdrop of different types of human motivational subjectivity. Trying to change a person's epistemology -- or 'style' of epistemology -- without getting to roots of his or her subjective motivational energy centre and bias -- is like trying to get rid of dandelions by pulling out the stems without digging out the roots as well. Without digging out the roots of a dandelion, the dandelion is just going to grow another flower and stem.
Trying to teach rational, objective, Enlightenment epistemology is not going to be very useful or fruitful unless or until you are sure that the person you are working with is dancing to the tune of Apollo and not Dionysus or 'Aprhrodite' (Goddess of love and romance), 'Aries' (God of war) or any of a host of other possible 'energy-centred Gods'.
Carl Jung went much deeper into this subject area than I will ever go. There are two ways of looking at a 'myth': one way is to look at a myth as an 'objective, epistemological falsity'; the second way to look at a myth is as a 'human subjective, motivational truth'. We are more interested in the second way of looking at myths in this context here.
But there is an even larger picture here. What I'm trying to do now -- which I didn't do back in 1979 because I couldn't, I didn't have the knowledge -- is to put the study of epistemology, or at least DGB Epistemology, into the larger context of 'Hegel's Hotel' as an entirely integrated network of 'sub-works'. In this regard, epistemology is not only a division of philosophy but it is also indirectly a division of psychology as well. For example, in Psychoanalysis, the study of epistemology might indirectly be incorporated into the study of 'ego-functioning' or 'Central-Ego-Functioning'.
If 'ego' means basically 'self', then 'ego-functioning' can be defined as all the different functions of the self. 'Epistemology' is one such function -- or actually, a number of 'inter-connected sub-functions' like 'sensory perception', 'association', 'distinction', and 'logical (or illogical) deduction and interpretation', 'feedback'...which I am all including under the name of 'central-ego-functioning'. This was mainly what my 1979 essay -- 'Evaluation and Health' was all about.
However, there are other 'ego-functions' other than 'epistemology' and 'central-ego-functioning. As well, epistemology is not the only function of the 'Central Ego'. 'Conflict-mediation', 'evaluation', 'response-choosing', 'consequence-interpreting', 'and 'executive action' -- within a 'DGB Philosophy-Psychology' mindset' -- are five other related sub-functions of 'The Central Ego'. The Central Ego is a metaphysical concept used to help breakdown and better comprehend all the different sub-functions of the 'Self' -- or 'Ego' -- or 'I'. I am my 'Central Ego' and my 'Central Ego' is me. But there are other 'periphery' or 'subsidery' functions of the Ego that are also worth naming, describing, and better understanding. These can be analogized to the 'Parliament', 'Senate', or 'Congress' in a 'State's' political activities relative to the 'President's Office', the 'Prime Minister's Office' -- or in business, the 'CEO's office'. All of these other names that can and will be discussed here in Hegel's Hotel: DGB Philosophy-Psychology are 'metaphysical concepts' used to help understand all the various 'sub-functions' relative to the philosophy, the psychology, and the executive action of the entire 'Ego', 'Self', or 'I'
You see, everything that man thinks and feels and does is 'projected outward into culture' -- politics, religion, mythology, art, music, sports, business, family, medicine, architecture, philosophy, psychology...
Religion is mythology and mythology is religion -- and both are a particular type of 'energy centre' dealing with a particular set of ego-functions and sub-functions that all can be equated to a particular type or brand of 'philosophy-psychology'.
Each part is connected to -- and plays a vital role in the overall functioning of -- the whole -- the Self, the Ego, or the I. In turn, the Self, the Ego, or the I, has a vital 'multi-dialectical relationship' with the functioning of the body -- and all its different part-functions. But we are primarily concerned with 'philosophy-psychology here -- not biology, physics, and chemisry -- although here too, everthing is wholistically connected -- mind and body, subject and object, spirit, senses, and soul...
In Hegel's Hotel: DGB Philosophy-Psychology everything is wholistically connected -- philosophy-psychology-science-medicine-art-religion-mythology-business-sports-entertainment-hobbies...These are all 'outward projections and reflections of the internal workings of man's multi-dialectical-philosophy-psychology'. They are all different cultural expressions of the many different internal 'energy-centres' and 'subsidiary-ego-functions' that are wholistically connected to the 'central-ego-functioning' of The Self.
This is 'the wholistic context of man's entire philosophy-psychology' that I didn't have back in 1979 when I wrote 'Evaluation and Health'. 'Evaluation and Health' provided the epistemological and the humanistic-existential foundation which is now 'Hegel's Hotel: DGB Philosophy-Psychology'.
Epistemology is the pursuit of 'truth and knowledge' in human philosophy-psychology. 'Humanistic-Existentialism' is one particular perspective in the pusuit of 'value, meaning, and action' in human philosophy-psychology. 'Evaluation and Health' was the foundational starting-point for both of these branches in the study of philosophy-psychology as presented through 'Hegel's Hotel: DGB Philosophy-Psychology.
For those of you who are interested in the study of 'epistemology' -- and the part language and semantics plays in epistemology -- I invite you to focus on your 'Apollonian energy centre' as we begin to study the interplay between 'truth and ethics' in my 1979 essay: 'Evaluation and Health'. I'm expecting a lot from you here as we focus for a while on man's philosphy-psychology primarily from the 'neck up'. Then after this, we will step away from 'Apollo' for a while and visit other more entertaining and dramatic 'energy-ego-centres': 'Narcissus' (narcissism), 'Dionysus' (sensuality, pleasure, celebration, dancing, sex...), 'Aphrodite' and/or 'Eros' (romance, love, passion, nature..), 'Aries' (war, deconstructionism...), and more...
I probably just made the study of 'Apollo', 'epistemology', and 'ethics' sound so boring that you may want to 'jump ship' on me here in order to 'fast-forward' to some of these other mythological Gods and external projections of internal 'energy-ego-centres'.
Alas, there can be no truth, ethics, justice, peace and harmony on earth if we all ignore 'Apollo'. Apollo is important -- and so too are both 'epistemology' and 'ethics'...So please...follow Apollo...with me...through 'Evaluation and Health'...
dgb, April 8th, 2008; modified and expanded, April 11th, 2008.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
