[From Bill Powers (960405.1130 MST)]
Brian D'Agostino <102574.1444@COMPUSERVE.COM> --
I have seen a recurrent pattern on this net of CSG leaders
expressing subjective opinions about everything from the theory of
evolution to the value of statistical methods in terms of what
"_PCT_" teaches, as if the CSG were a Vatican or a Politburo,
rather than a scientific organization. Isn't this way of thinking
and speaking productive of unnecessary conflict?
I don't think so. Suggesting applications for a theory is done all the
time. It only raises conflicts when someone else has a different theory
that leads to different subjective conclusions. The obvious thing to do
when that occurs is to devise experimental tests that will settle any
disputes. At the moment, we're just following out possible implications
of PCT, the understanding being that when we know how we'll do some
scientific investivations to see if they hold up.
My experience with therapies, for example, is that some are far
more effective than others. I have no way of reliably determining
to what extent this reflects the uniqueness of the needs I brought
to therapy vs. the uneven quality of the therapies themselves.
These are valid observations, even though subjective. I think what Kubie
was referring to was the work of experienced and successful therapists
when he said that they tend to converge in their methods. It's possible
that there are common elements in successful therapies, with many
characteristics of different approaches actually being irrelevant to
success, however important the differences are thought to be. The most
salient aspect of a school of therapy is not necessarily what makes it
successful when it is successful.
PCT (or ideas that arose through considering PCT) has some interesting
possibilities to offer by way of what the common factors may be.
As to scientific comparisons of different approaches to therapy, there
is no agreement that I know of on what would constitute a test, or how
one could judge success by any means other than asking the clients or
patients. Every school wants to apply criteria that favor its approach,
using its own definitions of what constitutes a psychological problem
and a problem-free person. I agree with your goal, but don't think
there's a practical way of reaching it just now.
As to your comments about the Vatican or Politboro of the CSG, you're a
little behind the times. The president of the CSG is now addressed as
"Comrade Pope," thus combining a much wider range of functions than
before. When people disagree with the PCT gospel, they are now
excommunicated first, then shot.
···
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Best,
Bill P.