> Chris:
> OK -- Now you should try to prove that you also may be categoized as a
> constructivist!!!
Dear James,
I loved your response to Devi's post. It made me recognise more
clearly something I'd only touched on in the other post I sent: the
extent to which the uncertainty factor in the reproductive aspect of
sex/intercourse, against the different uncertainties of the purely
pleasurable construction of the process, put it in a very different
category from eating, except perhaps at the table of a very deadly
enemy without a taster.
Seriously, I think there are big issues here and the extent to which
they link with the centrality of Kelly's ideas about prediction
underline something philosophically and logically excellent at the
heart of PCP: that's one of the reasons why I construe myself as
"a constructivist" or, more accurately, "someone not dishonest
being part of the constructivist and constructionist social spheres
of discourse. However, in Kelly's terms there's no doubt in my own
mind that psychoanalytic discourse is nearer to the academic and
clinical hearts (having only one heart can be a design fault) of my
core self.
I'm copying this to the list as I thought the challenge was fair and
probably one in others' minds!
_VERY_ best wishes to you,
Chris
Chris Evans, R&D Consultant,
Tavistock & Portman NHS Trust
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%