From: murphyg@Software.Mitel.COM (Gary Murphy)
Newsgroups: sci.psychology
Subject: Psychology (not unlike Re: NLP and what the .... are we talking about???)
Summary: Gary takes a stab at restoring sci to sci.psychology
Keywords: science sense nonsense sixth-sense psychology astronomy
Date: 5 Oct 92 19:30:50 GMT
	<BvLLEo.IF8@bunyip.cc.uq.oz.au> <1992Oct04.213813.103600@ua1ix.ua.edu>
	<1992Oct4.220314.7212@sfu.ca> <BvMyE5.3y7@news.cso.uiuc.edu>
Organization: Applications Software II, MITEL Corporation, Kanata, Ontario,
	Canada
In-reply-to: ffujita@s.psych.uiuc.edu's message of 5 Oct 92 06:37:15 GMT

In article <BvMyE5.3y7@news.cso.uiuc.edu> ffujita@s.psych.uiuc.edu (Frank Fujita) writes:
   probst@selkirk.sfu.ca (Scott Probst) writes:
   >oh?

   Oh?

Ok, so there are many grades of science, and two of my favourites are
the ones called Empirical and Theoretical.  

Example: a meeting of astronomers

Apparatus: some of those present love revising cosmologies, ready and hip to
the very latest Equations of State, Hot Bang and Bubble.   Others,
very scientifically, observe, and observe, and observe and ... well you
get the picture.

Hypothesis: (and this is a fair shot at what doing Science means) a
Model Builder asserts Condition A cannot happen, AND Condition A happens
to be in the realm of the observable.

Methodology: Somebody out with their eyes to the glass sees X and
wonders if X implies A.  They tell two friends and they tell two friends
(did you REALLY think conferences have anything to do with either
Speakers or Beer?) and Dr. Somebody, or more likely his assistant,
perks up (having dozed a moment) and says, "We observed A just last
week.  You mean we shouldn't have?"

Back to Yogi Berra: You can observe a lot, just by watching.  The
Modellers go sharpen their pencils and grease up their slide rules and
hop out to the Wilsons for more graph paper ('cause the kid's got the PC
tied up with Monkey Island), and Science Perpetuates.

Is this any different than Leakey's Angels (Chimps do not eat meat!
Chimps do not wage war! Orangutangs are lazy louts! All aspirin are
alike!) or Lorenz's Geese or Piaget's kids?  Why are the NLP
practitioners not the 'amateur astronomers' and why are the Ivory
Towerists not clamouring to put forth predictions of the well known and
much admitted unknown of NLP: where does it not work?

Curious, that last one. Bandler and Grinder dispised that question
because psychologists always asked _them_.  That is upside down: if
psychology is worth anything, psychologists should be saying to B&G,
"Very nice observation! Ingenious apparatus!  Can you try this here? My
bet is it won't work in this case, and for a beer, I will tell you why I
think it never will!"

Instead, B&G report psychologists disliking the Empirical answer, "Lots
of places ... you'll find them." Why? Is it because Psychologists want
what they give their clients, unquestioned assertions and constant
confirmations that appeal to an 'intuitive' evaluation, clear and clean
as a line of Freud's coke, something to numb doubt and answer all raised
hands before the bell rings?

So, Mr. Theoretician, we all know if we only seek confirmation, we will
find it.  Where, in your much esteemed position (and I didn't say by whom)
will NLP always, realiably and unquestionably fail?

And Mr. Observer, on your next observing session, do you think you could
find that case?  Do you think your collegue in Japan can find it too?

Of course, this would only prove what is obvious, obvious, obvious in
every science and humanity under the sun _except_ psychology: the Map(s)
is (are) not the territory(s?).

As pure conjecture in the fine tradition of Freud and Jung, my intuition
told me on my first readings of NLP, a theory of this would belong to
Connectionists, which is why even ludicrous techniques like papers on
the floor in a circle will work --- not many Catholic Priests would try
that! If humans can only ascend by Grace, the papers on the floor would
never work, but Lee has seen it (an observation) and presumably we could
observe it again.  I rather expect the model of the Priests would
quickly be updated to a more precise meaning of "ascend", and _that_, my
friends, is Science.

Now ... what needs doing?

--
Gary Lawrence Murphy/murphyg@software.mitel.com/mitel!software!murphyg@uunet.ca
 Mitel Corp - 350 Legget Drive, Kanata, Ontario, Canada - (613) 592-2122 x3709
"Trying to subdue a wave by striking it only results in a thousand waves"
                        - Dr. Morita Masatake