Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
Date:         Tue, 15 Dec 1992 02:14:25 EST
              <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
From:         Monika Trzcinska <054470@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Common-Sense Knowledge In Ps

On Mon, 14 Dec 1992 19:04:00 EST Todd.Nelson said:

>Matthew,
>
>Ah, another "ostrich" among us!
>
>I was quite surprised by your postings today, I was erroneously under the
>impression that Eric, Tor, and myself were making headway in persuading you of
>the 'error of your ways.' :)
>
>It seems that your position on the debate one of curious advocacy of ignorance
>of the issue at hand. You are essentially saying "It is not a problem. If we
>don't focus on it, it is not a problem." How scientific is that?
>
>You say that psychologists shouldn't concern themselves with 'ranting and
>raving at the pulpit,' about the issue at hand (see "common sense knowledge in
>psychology"--original posting). Who's ranting?
>
>I guess I'm a bit puzzled that ANYONE would advocate a 'do-nothing' policy
>when it comes to advancing our field as a science in the public's (and
>student's, and other faculty's) eyes. If we all buried our head in the sand as
>you seem to be advocating, ignorance and misconceptions about the SCIENCE of
>psychology would continue as it always has.
>
>In answer to the above, you say that all our field needs is for all of us who
>are concerned about having others perceive us as a legitimate science, to
>begin to ACT like scientists. By your argument, if we just all go about doing
>our business of science in psychology, then others will naturally see our work
>and say "Gee, they ACT like scientists, so psychology must be a legitimate
>science."
>
>Well, maybe in a perfect world.
>
>Reality is against you on this one Matthew. Can you imagine how long it will
>take our field to eliminate the many misconceptions about it if we all took NO
>active role in correcting those misperceptions, but rather relied on some
>vague evolutionary flow of information (who's going to make sure the info is
>accurate?) to the public (& students)?
>
>I think many of us will agree that we should NOT take the
>hide-your-head-in-the-sand-and-voila!--no problem!-stance that Matthew seems
>to be taking on this issue. Matthew says that we should start acting like
>scientists, and others will treat us like scientists. I say that part of being
>a scientist is working to advance your discipline AS A SCIENCE in the public's
>view. This is especially true for psychology. We all need to wear two hats as
>both psychological scientist (and practitioner) AND a worker for the 'public
>relations' between psychology as a science/practice, mediating between our
>discipline and the public perceptions of our discipline,...working to
>eliminate the discrepancies between the latter two.
>
>Best to all,
>
>Todd D. Nelson
>Department of Psychology
>Michigan State University
>East Lansing, MI 48824
>22817MGR@MSU.Bitnet

Sorry Tod, but I have to disagree with you.  Matthew did not advocate "hiding
in the sand like an austrich", in contrary, he advicated (if I understand
correctly) that simply bitching and complaining about our status as
psychologists-in-need-of-recognition-as-scientists, will do didly squat, if
we will only resign "talking about it".  By taking on certain constructive
attitides, like teaching when the opportunity arises, publishing, talking to
"lay people" at a coctail party, :-) can eventually change the opinions.
Like a song says "Life is what you make it..."


                                 _
    ) (    Monika Trzcinska    _- o   ) (   054470@ACADVM1.UOTTAWA.CA
   )   (----------------------- o o  )   (----------------------------
    ) (                        -_ o   ) (
                                 -
   "The most important attitude that can be formed is that of a desire
    to go on learning".
                                                  Dewey (1938)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad