I just ran across a post on a blog about the work of Lynn Margulis. We've had some discussions here regarding the precision with which words "should" be used, and I found this particular post to be relevant as it discusses this issue as it impacts research itself. Jorge, you may find it of interest. I also wish to say that it does not necessarily form an excuse for any shortcomings I may have in my own communication skills, I just thought it well written and important to consider.
Read the post (#47 by Greg Laden) here.
- NonE











Quite thought-provoking
Thanks, NonE.; his comments neatly encapsulate some challenges I’ve experienced both in and outside academia. Two things he wrote are worth putting here.
It has seemed to me over the years that fields such as psychology and sociology are entirely minefield, at least for some individuals—and thinking of psychology in particular, part of that is due to the increasing distance between formal psychology and self-help psychology. One might put it another way, as theoretical vs. applied psychology, but in some areas those categories aren’t quite that neat—neuropsychology is one that comes to mind.
Also, while he may be correct that the best way to disabuse individuals of misconceptions is a “grab and wrestle” approach, we who’ve tried it with respect to the freedom philosophy know that it isn’t always a welcome method.
Here’s the second paragraph that stood out for me:
No need to elaborate there, I think.
And as a general note regarding the tangled conversations on egos, the self, et cetera, I have more to contribute; but that will almost certainly happen as a new ramble, rather than chasing ideas through the comment thickets.