Hello y'all from overseas,
In a recent post, someone mentioned the "law of parsimony".
My intervention has implications on two levels (at least, and as far as we
are concerned on this list): epistemological and pedagogical. Of course both
are intertwined.
This reference to such a "law of parsimony" made me jump on (or off?) my
seat for at least 2 reasons:
1. whoever said that there was such a "law"? Is it a natural law? Or is it
just a theoretical statement? Technically, shouldn't it be refered to as a
principle, a postulate or an axiom?
2. what is being refered to when we talk about a "law of parsimony": is this
an allusion to "Occam's razor" , ie the principle that tends to reduce the
number causes to a minimum?
If this is the case, it seems to me that there is at best an abuse of
language, or worse a retrospective illusion or anachronism. In the context
of medieval scholatic philosophy/theology -with its array of metaphysical
agents, causes or intermediate realms of beings-, we can understand that
some philosophers would plead for such a principal as "reduction" or
simplification, ie. Occam's razor.
But are we dealing with the same thihgs when we are at grasp with political
issues (and their horrific outbursts such as terrorism, or ethnic cleansing)
or issues like violence in schools, or when we try to understand and treat
pathologies such as autism, anorexia, OCD, or panic disorders to name but a
few?
I recently read that the alleged "causes" for pathologies such as autism or
mental anorexia can add up to about 130 in the history of the different
theories that have tried to explain these pathologies.
My question is : "How do you deal with the question of complexity and
multiple factors or causes?"
It strikes me how the more a phenomenon, -be it medical, psychological, or
political in its scope- is uncomprehensible, or escapes our control, the
more "causal" and "simple" -or simplistic- explanations/solutions it
receives.
When we are faced with complexity, is it objective or subjective? is it
just that we don't have the answer right at hand -then either we label
things complex (until we find a simple/unique explanation), or we try to
dismiss or dissolve complexity by invoking simple causes or explanations...
Or are some phenomenons really complex and shoud be treated as such?
It again strikes me when I hear or read scientific vulgarization magazines
or TVshows how quickly commentators resort to phrases like: "Biologists (or
geneticians) have now found a gene responsible for XYZ (your choice) ..." OR
"We now know it is genetic..." .
No later than yesterday did we hear from some (unknown and obscure - be
reassured) French psychologist, that jealousy for example (and by extension
other behavioral problems in children) has genetic causes, implying that we
should deculpabilize parents, and find the right treatment/pill.
(Did I hear someone in the back of the class mustering something about the
rise and prevalence of ADHD diagnostics in the USA and the increase in
Ritalin prescription? :-))
My reflexion goes from there into 2 directions:
1. The question of the distinction between causal and correlational
explanations: is this distinction purely rhetorical? or do we mean what we
say when we say that for such or such phenomenon there is no causal (and
simple) explanation?
2. How do we seriously take into account the complexity of psychological
phenomenons?
3. How do we integrate and articulate the differents levels, fields and
disciplines that come up with explanations/treatments of pathologies?
4. To what extent is reductionism still alive and creeping around?
5. Aren't we inclined to a certain fascination toward biological
(genetic/neurological) explanations ? and, coupled with "theories" such as
reductionism or "law of parsimony", doesn't this fascination finally
misserve or disserve psychology as a discipline?
6. (;-)) Is there a label for the fascination described under 5?
Comments awaited. Thank you for your patience.
Phil Gervaix
Switzerland
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
