Re: Some further thoughts on construing inputs from PFE

Tim A. Connor (
Sat, 23 Jan 1999 20:21:49 -0800 (PST)


This raised, for me, a couple of questions that are perhaps left over from
our previous discussion on "unconscious" construing, but which seem
relevant here: How, in your view, does PCP account for ambivalence? And
how does it account for surprise?



On Sat, 23 Jan 1999, Josh Soffer wrote:

> I view kelly as arguing that the only value, the only meaning of an
> imput is to be located in the relative success with which the person on
> a multidimensionall level , finds basis of overall simiolarity between
> than imput and his meaning system as a whole allowing for contrasts at a
> suboridnate level). There is no such thing as stimulation that is
> preconstrued, that is not already precieved in the context of an
> attitude of relation, a mood, an interpretive stance. This could be
> along a continuum ranging fro delighted understanding to terrrified
> rejection, and including such ambivalent middle affects as boredom,
> indifference, irritation. >

Tim Connor, M.S. "Psychotherapy is not
Pacific University an applied science, it
School of Professional Psychology is a basic science in
2004 Pacific Avenue which the scientists
Forest Grove, OR 97116 USA are the client and his
<> therapist"
--George Kelly