Psychology of Negative Variablism

Nathan Coppedge

Psychology of Negative Variablism

Nathan Coppedge

visibility

…

description

2 pages

link

1 file

Nathan Coppedge, author of the Dimensional Psychologist's Toolkit which is pending publication, addresses an important concern about the variables used in psychology, and the need for double-negative assessment. The method he develops is intended to produce clarity in clinical environments and therapy, knowledge that could readily be shared with the patient.

PSYCHOLOGY OF NEGATIVE VARIABLISM ABSTRACT: Nathan Coppedge, author of the Dimensional Psychologist’s Toolkit which is pending publication, addresses an important concern about the variables used in psychology, and the need for double-negative assessment. The method he develops is intended to produce clarity in clinical environments and therapy, knowledge that could readily be shared with the patient. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- It seems that variablism has been subject to a semantic mistake in psychology. For it is often used to refer to increments of time---morphizations---which, as clinically interesting as they might be when provided with specific evidence, provide almost no key to theories of development. In other words, variablism has been treated as an empty set. Variables have been used as an obfuscation, a mystification---of chronology---the thing most likely to be simplified and ignored. Indeed, chronology is what I’m actually referring to by the commonly held concept of the variable. The second implied variable, besides time, is actually theory, and at that point it gets obfuscated, not out of a failure of theory, but out of a lack of theory. What then, is the correct criterion of assessment, if it is not applied theory, and if it is not chronological cases (one being obfuscated by a lack of a variable, and the other being obfuscated by time)? The correct approach is to find a variable which does not represent a set of assumptions at all, not a blind variable, or a test variable or an organic variable in the sense of clinical cases, but instead a variable that is dynamic enough to itself define some of the context of the analysis. First, the variable will be independent of a subject’s emotions. Second, it will be defined relatively to exist in any context that could be described---it is universal. Thirdly, there is some criterion for determining that it exists. It must exist as a hypothesis. Fourthly, and most importantly, the criteria that determine that it does not exist must instead determine that it is modified. Now, here are some variables that work this way: Negativity is not negative emotion, but instead the willingness to complexity, lie, or make paradoxes. There is no need to define the exact case except to see that each case involves multiple senses of meaning. It can be measured by measuring indirectness and intellectualization. (Here it may be recognized that there may be multiple valid hypotheses). Emotions do not exist negatively, but only honestly or dishonestly. Positive sadness is not the opposite of positive happiness, it is only a different state. The two may exist simultaneously through negativity. Certainty is another variable, which reflects a person’s acceptance of reality. If the person is delusional, we cannot say they lack reality. Instead, we say that that objectively for them, “reality isn’t real.” Acceptance measures the degree to which reality is real. It is a measurement of confidence about the things of life. It can be measured by assessing hesitance and asking about the person’s sense of clarity. When the person lacks certainty, there is a problem, whether or not it is a problem with reality. In this way, it is highly objective. Comfort is another variable which assesses objectivity, thus avoiding the problem of misplaced confidence. Comfort assesses how someone feels independent of honesty, and independent of what I call negativity. Thus, it measures maturity and confidence that may exist without certainty. It also measures the evaluation of self-knowledge of existence, which may exist with or without complexity. Thus, it adds complexity to simplicity and adds simplicity to complexity, when it is affirmative. The result is that comfort adds complexity, while discomfort adds simplicity. This helps to assess that someone with certainty is having a problem (misplaced confidence from comfortable simplicity), or someone with negativity lacks certainty (has complexity but is uncomfortable). In general, in this context of assessment other concerns involve more direct addresals of certainty or negativity, such as complexity, lying, or paradoxes. Nathan Coppedge, SCSU 3/22/2014

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.

Log In

Psychology of Negative Variablism

Related papers

Related papers

Related topics

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.