Return-path: <dummy@tom.compulink.co.uk>
Received: from tom.compulink.co.uk by KUHUB.CC.UKANS.EDU (PMDF V5.0-4 #9008)
id <01HUYDKTR1WG8WZLME@KUHUB.CC.UKANS.EDU> for cromwell@KUHUB.CC.UKANS.EDU;
Wed, 06 Sep 1995 11:43:10 -0500 (CDT)
Received: (from root@localhost) by tom.compulink.co.uk (8.6.9/8.6.9)
id RAA20472 for cromwell@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu; Wed, 06 Sep 1995 17:43:04 +0100
Date: Wed, 06 Sep 1995 17:41 +0100
From: postmaster@cix.compulink.co.uk
Subject: Failed mail.
To: cromwell@KUHUB.CC.UKANS.EDU
Message-id: <729500@cix.compulink.co.uk>
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Your message was not delivered to rsymonds@cix.compulink.co.uk
For the following reason:
Could not create users mail basket
This result may also be due to the user
not existing on the system
You may also find that you now have a mail message
in your outbasket that is marked unread to this user and
as it was not sent to the user it will remain unread
You can remove this entry by the command
delete <nnn> where nnn is the message number
For more information contact cixadmin@cix.compulink.co.uk
Message text follows:
-----------------
>From pcp-request@mailbase.ac.uk Wed Sep 6 17:41:33 1995
Received: from norn.mailbase.ac.uk (daemon@norn.ncl.ac.uk [128.240.226.1]) by
tom.compulink.co.uk (8.6.9/8.6.9) with ESMTP id RAA19911 for
<rsymonds@cix.compulink.co.uk> Wed, 6 Sep 1995 17:41:33 +0100
Received: by norn.mailbase.ac.uk id <RAA07224@norn.mailbase.ac.uk>
(8.6.12/ for mailbase.ac.uk); Wed, 6 Sep 1995 17:09:06 +0100
Received: from kuhub.cc.ukans.edu by norn.mailbase.ac.uk id
<RAA07207@norn.mailbase.ac.uk>
(8.6.12/ for mailbase.ac.uk) with ESMTP; Wed, 6 Sep 1995 17:09:00 +0100
Received: from kuts10p01.cc.ukans.edu by KUHUB.CC.UKANS.EDU (PMDF V5.0-4 #9008)
id <01HUYCD5DO288XGP81@KUHUB.CC.UKANS.EDU> for pcp@mailbase.ac.uk; Wed,
06 Sep 1995 11:07:58 -0500 (CDT)
Date: Wed, 06 Sep 1995 11:12:42 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Rue L. Cromwell" <cromwell@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu>
Subject: Re: DSM-IV AND CONSTRUCTIVISM
To: pcp@mailbase.ac.uk
Message-id: <cromwell.1160788002D@KUHUB.CC.UKANS.EDU>
X-Mailer: VersaTerm Link v1.1.5
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
X-List: pcp@mailbase.ac.uk
Reply-To: pcp@mailbase.ac.uk
Sender: pcp-request@mailbase.ac.uk
Precedence: list
Apparently-To: rsymonds@cix.compulink.co.uk
>
>
>On 3 Sep 1995, Lindsay Oades wrote:
>
>> 1) Instead of being based on simple symptom listing and categorisation, the
>> "constructivist DSM" could employ 'professional constructs' defining disorder
>> in terms of imbalances between psychological processes - eg tight and loose
>> construing -a la Winter and Kelly
>>
>> 2) Instead of listing and categorising symptoms similarities and differences
>> in meanings of peoples experiences (and/ or the narratives they employ or are
>> employed about them) within the above defined 'disorders'.
>>
>> 3)The diagnostic process would aim in no way to adopt any quasi-realist feel.
>> That is, it would serve the purpose of a direction for assisting the client-
>> a transitive diagnosis- forming the basis of Leitner's dispositional
>> assessment.
>>
>> 4)"Being constructivist DSM", rather simply matching disorder with treatment
>> (and making the mistake of treating the therapist as a fixed-effect) it
seems
>> that there would be more interest in matching client, therapist and treatment
>> approach by epistemic assumptions.
>>
>> These are just a few initial ideas. What do people think?
>> Lindsay G Oades
>> Wollongong
>>
>
>I found both the original paper and these comments to be very exciting.
>I personally have been working with an alternative theory of personality
>which is in a very early stage but I thought some of it was relevent here.
>
>The traditional theory of personality is based on the idea that the world
>is filled with objects and these objects have characteristics that are
>inherent to them. Thus, if you are wearing a red shirt, the "red" is a
>property of the shirt. This is, in tern, based on the same 19th century
>mechanistic science that the DSM comes from.
>
>In my own work, I am examining what would be the implication of applying
>modern quantum physics as a model instead of the old Newtonian model.
>
>In my approach, the idea is that personality is NOT a characteristic of a
>person. Rather, it is a product of the interaction of the person's
>behavior (motor activity) and the observer's interpretation of that
>behavior. In PCP terms, personality is the result of the constructs
>produced by the observer.
>
>If anyone is interesed, I'd be happy to discuss it further.
>
>
>
> Jack
Your assumptions are precisely those of J. R. Kantor's interbehavioral
theory. He was a rebel against both Watson and Skinner, and, interestingly,
it was in his journal, Psychological Record, that Kelly chose to publish in
his early days at Fort Hays State Teachers College in Kansas. What goes
around comes around.
Cheers.
Rue
Rue L. Cromwell
cromwell@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu
----- End of Forwarded message -----
Rue L. Cromwell
cromwell@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%