From: Eugene Frison <cthulhu_calls.nul> Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 14:16:28 -0500 Archived: Thu, 19 Apr 2012 06:28:53 -0400 Subject: Re: Ufology And Psychiatry - Summary >From: Kathy Kasten <catraja.nul> >To: <post.nul> >Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2012 19:17:38 +0000 >Subject: Re: Ufology And Psychiatry - Summary >>From: William Treurniet <wtreurniet.nul> >>To: post.nul >>Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2012 10:52:26 -0400 >>Subject: Re: Ufology And Psychiatry - Summary >>The inability of scientists to recognize the limitations of >>their own knowledge, etc. is what I remember from many of Ray's >>contributions. I think you may be misrepresenting him a bit. Is >>this a manifestation of inattentional blindness? Indirect >>realism? >Thanks William for bringing the discussion back to the point. In >my mind, at least. Of course, all the commentators to the >original post seem to be having a problem with their ability to >step back and realize most of their responses come off as >emotional - from the gut as it were. I am not saying that is >wrong, it is just a fact of the matter. Since you said _all_ the commentators, I have to disagree. Not a fact at all, Kathy. At least in my case, I know I am not responding based on emotion. I usually just lurk and read the various posts. I prefer to not get involved in the "fray" as you termed it. This has been my strategy for a very long time. I usually adhere to it. But every now and then someone says something that is so blatently ignorant or stupid that I just don't let it pass without comment - because it needs to be put in proper perspective and not because of any "from the gut" emotional reaction. Saying someone has made a dumb remark is not tantamount to calling that person dumb. I say dumb things quite often and _do_ dumb things just as often. Yet I am far from dumb. >Me? I love reading Ray's comments. They are never boring or >reflecting the usual approach to ufo investigation. But, then, >my guess is that you all would toss me into the same bin as Ray. >But, before you do that think the move through. Sometimes, most >of you come off with a knee jerk reaction. It is as if you are >defending an indefensible position. Sometimes, it comes close to >simply name calling. Believe me, I know I am not above the fray. >I know that I sometimes enjoy sticking it to whoever is trying >to stick it to me. Onward, charge, blithely into the fray. I usually love reading Ray's posts too. And I often agree with him. I haven't tossed him into any bin. Regarding name calling, I began each and every one of my posts with Ray's actual name. Never anything else. It was Ray who did not provide me with the same courtesy and called me "friend" and it was obvious from the way he used that term in the sentence that it was in a demeaning context. Psychology is full of problems. I have been conceding this since the beginning. It is full of people using unproven tenets of the field in completely subjective interpretations and applications. It is full of conflicting systems. But it _is_ a science. It does use proper scientific methodology. It has produced and continues to produce valuable and verifiable data. A lot of what it has come up with is directly applicable to the study of ufos. UFO researchers who do not apply certain psychological knowledge during ufo investigation are not as thorough as they need to be. The primary instrument in the study of ufo phenomenon is the witness. Every instrument needs to be properly calibrated. This is where psychology makes its contribution to the study of ufos. It helps calibrate the human witness. The problems in psychology exist. Nobody is disputing this. But some people want to throw the whole field out. That's wrong. That simply can't be justified. It won't ever happen. Psychology will continue to exist, improve itself, and make contributions that will affect the ufo field - no matter how many ufo researchers disdain it, drag their feet when it comes to accepting it, or stick their heads in the sand to ignore it. Psychology _does_ have some valuable understanding of the human being, of the human mind. It has obtained this through good science and proper methodology. You can't dismiss this. To attempt to do so is the only "defending an indefensible position' that is occuring. Eugene Frison Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast At: http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/sdi/program/ These contents above are copyright of the author and UFO UpDates - Toronto. They may not be reproduced without the express permission of both parties and are intended for educational use only.
[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |
UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp