Re: A paper on the ideological premises supporting the rhetoric of
Sun, 17 Sep 1995 17:36:33 -0400

sked for

As someone who has read and been influenced by Kellian information for the
past twenty years, I think it is wonderful that a high school student from
New York can access Kelly's work through the Internet. I remember the
trouble I had as an undergrad finding Kelly's original book due to a
publishing dispute. Kelly's book had been stolen from several major
libraries. There was no journal at the time. Virtually no university had a
Kellian outside the Psychology programs at the Doctoral level. Excluding Don
Bannister, there was virtually no books on Kelly's work excepting Kelly's.
His work was rapidly disappearing from the beginning psychology

I think it is important to continue to push Kelly's work and ideas into the
mainstream so that it is accessible and undestandable. I think it is
important that there are those that take the time to explain and encourage
further study and free thought.

I also think it is important not chastise and argue about whom is the most
"pure" in their Kellian interpretation. Repgrid theorists, artificial
intelligence theorists, practicing clinicians, idiographic narrativists,
muckety mucks, discouraged renegades, new and ambitious masters students,
naive do-gooders, developmental theorists, Australians, Americans, English,
Africans, Italians, Spaniards, and others have all contributed to the current
body of work.

It is wonderful that someone (James Mancuso?) took the time to work and help
that student learn and foster Kelly's and that students ideas.

How the above listed group responds to others and between themselves can
determine if a new student will take the time to learn the nuances of a
wonderful theory.

The infighting, turf-battling, and the jeolousies amongst all the various
groups is almost immediately apparent and not very attractive. Mike Mascolo's
comments of several weeks ago led to a discussion identical in content to
many I heard in 1978 and in 1984 at conferences from Kellians throughout the
world. It is my belief that it has also destroyed much original thought and
discussion in increasing the "range of conveniance" of Kelly's ideas.

Kelly himself branched into international diplomacy. Please allow free
thought and ideas to expand the use of Kelly's ideas. The internet should
encourage greater integration accross disciplines by diseminating

Kelly had a spirit of fun infused into his writing along with experimentation
and humor. I feel this appeal is largely missing in the way in which his
work is presently being explored. It presently contains many "right ways"
and "wrong ways" to go about things for a "scientist" to go about learning
how "an ordinary human being" might think about things and decide what they
would do next.

Kelly himself might have made fun of the tightness to which many Kellians
adhere to his original constuction in determining the behavior of an
individual. His writing suggests that he may have allowed himself a much
greater freedom to explore other methods and activities based upon his ideas.

The fun can be returned by involving and not excluding other disciplines
within and outside of psychology.