Re: Jung/PCP & preemption

Hemant Desai (
Sat, 25 Feb 1995 08:50:00 -0600 (CST)

Devi wrote:

> Jonathan D Raskin, Jim Mancuso, and Chris Evans-

> Jonathan's last posting touches on my reason for ire.
> Alternative constructivism, as I struggled to articulate in the last thread
> in which I took part, does- if one's not careful- legitimise _any_ view or
> opinion:

> >Constructive alternativism implies to me that an infinite number of ways of
> >>looking at Analytical Psychology and PCP's relationship to each other are
> >>possible. Therefore, while you may construe it to be silly to look for links
> >>between the ideas of Kelly and Jung, from other theorists' perspectives doing
> >>so proves quite fruitful.
> Said Jon. "Infinite". Okay. But perspectives which allow for an infinite
> number of implications are likely to be banal and empty of meaning;
> usefulness is about the discovery and specification of conditions,
> constraints and limitations under which statements are usable or otherwise
> and that's as true of whole theories as it is of individual predictive
> statements made using those theories.

Devi, I agree. However they importance is not how MANY construals one
can make between a given dichotomy but how many WAYS of construing are
consensually found to be knowledge.

There appear to me, for instance, at least three levels (in terms of the
number, type or framework used for ranking similarities and differences)
in making a Kelly-Jung distinction. For example, consider the following


Ontology X O

Epistemology O X

Teleology X O

Let this type of comparison represent level 1 of basic triadic distinction.
Then the next level of complexity could be added via numbered values as the
degree of qualification for each type in say, Pepper's framework:

Formism Mechanism Organicism Contexualism

KELLY 1 0 2 3

JUNG 1 0 3 2

NOTE: min=0 and max=4

Further, a plot can be made of the theories using mainstream
psychological constructs of development, motivation, and personality.


FORMIST CONTENT Similar/Different Similar/Different

PERSONALITY/PROCESS Constrast-Constructs Integration-Disintegration

MOTIVATION/PURPOSE Anticipation-Science Evolution-Religion

To conclude, PCP can be used at each level of comparison
(and is in effect in some way building on the relationships of the
previous one) between the work of Carl Jung and George Kelly. That
is not to say of course that any or all construals are considered
equally useful. It is only the socially validated ones that are found
as most useful. Perhaps therein lies the usefulness of PCP.

Any thoughts on this? Hemant

Examples (c) 1995 Hemant K. Desai

In summary it could be said that generally speaking Kelly emphasizes structure
of thinking while Jung focuses on purpose. hd