Re: Jung/PCP & preemption

Devi (
Sat, 25 Feb 1995 23:52:05 +0000

Jim Mancuso says:

>HOW DARE YOU accuse me of having discussed *preemption?*
>Maybe I did! Maybe I was trying to say that I am unhappy with the
>claims that PCP types have a propensity to *preemption.*
>Maybe, since *preemption* is seen as BAD stuff, someone can explain why
>it is BAD. First, I need to know the referent of the term, in YOUR view -- or
>someone else's.

Okay Jim:
1. _You_ didn't accuse anyone of pre-emption; Jonathan and Chris subtly did.
2. Referents: I understood them to be using the definition of pre-emption
as a construal which excludes all other possible construals (the "nothing
but" definition, surely a dirty word amongst pcp'ers)- which did an
injustice to your view and to the seriousness with which one would like to
take the arguments which _they_ offered against your own position.

And then _you_ felt that you had something about which you should
apologise, and continue to do so:
>Sorry if I didn't make that clear -- I am, indeed,
>speaking from my construction system, and I would like to reach a
>>consensually validatable construction which would allow us to work from the
>>proposition that these aforementioned theories do derive from incompatible
And there's nothing _wrong_ with "speaking from one's own construction
system" (dammit, what else is it possible to do?)?

I say again to them, "please stop using 'pre-emption' as a subtle polemic",
and to you, "please stop apologising for holding views contrary to other
people when they accuse you of pre-emption!"

Anyway, Rue Cromwell's posting
>To identify the incompatibility between two theories is a cause for excitement
>and joy
expresses, more elegantly than I did, my thought that there is value in
discovering the constraints on compatibility between theories,

and, acting in the role of originator, David S. Remmert's message id
<199502252055.OAA01956> seeks to bring this interesting thread to a close,

and so I shall now belt up. (While continuing to read any other postings on
this isue with interest and glee.)


Devi Jankowicz.