Challenge to Bob
Tue, 19 Mar 1996 11:43:22 -0500

Content-ID: <0_478_827253800@mail06.16554>
Content-type: text/plain

Attach file.

Content-ID: <0_478_827253800@mail06.16555>
Content-type: text/plain;
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

In your response to my article in 1986
criticizing death theat theory, you
said that ""Close examination of
Chambers' argument reveals that his
position is grounded in an incomplete
understanding of both personal construct
theory and other cognitive theories..." =

This was in your abstract.
You have still not addressed my theoretical
objections to death threat theory, nor my
subsequent empirical points. In my three =

published articles on death threat theory =

and in my unpublishable article concerning
the Price of Experience, I referenced a
number of specific points from Kelly, Piaget
and others. The world's expert on death
threat theory has yet to address the points.
Your claim that I do not know what I am
talking about was thus unsubstantiated and
was a personal attack. I am concerned about
the ethics of this, both with regard to the
impact of your dismissal on my career and on
the welfare of the patients of death threat =

therapists. You did not address my ideas with
sincerity, you just dismissed me as a dilletante,
and went on to greater fame and fortune =

through death threat theory. Bob, this is the way
Sophists behave. They attack the man and not
the argument. When they are in turn attacked
for their ad hominems, they act offended and
get their friends to use social validation where
logical, empirical and moral validation does not
exist. =

I recently had a job interview. They did not
want to know that I had competed nine
statistics courses in graduate school, nor
many more courses on therapy, nor that over =

1200 people from over 54 countries had =

requested my psychometrics package called
CASPER. They were unconcerned about my
excellent teaching evaluations. They could
care less about corresponding regressions, or
logical consistency, or integrative complexity,
or the Personal Construct Inventory, or the =

Group Psychological Abuse scale. They did
not ask about Circumgrids, nor all the free =

statistics consulting I have done over the years.
Nor my ten years of teaching. Nor the 1500
books I have read, including most of Piaget
and Kelly several times. Nor my views on
death threat theory. Nor what it must have
been like raising a disabled child. They
wanted to know if I knew their good friend
Bob Neimeyer- the expert on construct
I did not get the job.
I heard you comment on any
of the postings I have made concerning
corresponding regressions. I would
expect the worlds greatest expert on =

construct theory to have something to say
about this measure, even if it is nothing =

but "Bill Chambers does not know what he =

is talking about." I am not surprised that
you have avoided my ideas on the net. =

You might be forced to agree that I am not
completely stupid, crazy, nothing
but vitriolic and not nice and sweet like the
special people in exotic places who get
appointed to journal editorial boards with
little background in PCP.
Bob, how about you and me have a =

talk about Death Threat Theory. One
that everybody can hear on the net.
We can pretend we like each other and
have respect for one another as scholars.
We can make our points about death
threat theory, point by point, hand in hand.
We can restrict our arguments to the
points, since everyone already knows how
we feel about each other personally. We
might even discuss the ethics of doing
nothing to fix what may be broken.
We really should be accountable for our
claims to fame and fortune. But just right
now, I have to go cut some oak fire wood.
Oh how I wish I were a real scholar like
you, and could spend the rest of the day
playing professor. Regardless, I remain:
Your Huckleberry,
p.s. Dave, I am sorry if this seems too vitriolic for your net. I will to=
it down if you think I must. =