home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
- Path: sparky!uunet!gatech!paladin.american.edu!auvm!UKANVM.BITNET!HOPE
- X-Acknowledge-To: <HOPE@UKANVM>
- Message-ID: <PSYCGRAD%92091110092333@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
- Newsgroups: bit.listserv.psycgrad
- Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 08:57:05 CDT
- Sender: "Psychology Graduate Students Discussion Group List"
- <PSYCGRAD@UOTTAWA.BITNET>
- From: Mike Babyak <HOPE@UKANVM.BITNET>
- Subject: Re: re:anima
- In-Reply-To: Message of Thu, 10 Sep 1992 22:29:00 EDT from <ADLIN@UTKVX>
- Lines: 10
-
- But rich, that is exaclty my point. No matter how scientific a construct,
- it is still a construct and therefore entails a set of assumptions and
- beliefs, some or all of which are not necessarily testable.
- The question we must ask, I think, is about utility -- are there
- constructs that better explain and/or correspond to our experience?
- I for one have no discomfort whatsoever with religious metaphors, provided
- they are freely chosen by an individual.
-
- MIKE BABYAK UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS *THERE'S NO PLACE LIKE HOME*
- HOPE@UKANVM
-