Kyberean, of course you are free to choose what you wish to ignore, but to disregard the entire body of psychology? That's certain folly! :P

Lychgate:

Read again the concluding section of my post in reply to Phillip:

Quote:

That isn't to deny the value of psychology as a tool (just as I would not deny the value of medicine as a tool), but I cannot accept the notion that psychology, be it Freudian, Jungian, or whomever-ian, ultimately explains anything.

To each his own folly, I suppose. To suggest that psychology is the arbiter of everything, or that all is reducible to psychology, as so many do today, seems the epitome of folly, to me.

Kyberean Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> To each his own folly, I suppose. To suggest that
> psychology is the arbiter of everything, or that
> all is reducible to psychology, as so many do
> today, seems the epitome of folly, to me.

It is this ultimate, this use as an "arbiter of everything" that I also oppose -- I've seen the same use of ultimates with sciences, with religion, what whatsobloodyever you might name -- economics, and so on. Just last night, I heard someone refer to medicine entirely in economically derived terms, and doctors' practices as "business models"... this abhorred and enraged me.

Simply, psychology, as any other field of human endeavour, is not the be-all and end-all of human knowledge. It is a handmaiden to truth, not the golden road to truth.