Posted by Cptn. boB on April 10, 2000, at 15:46:05
In reply to Re: BIOLOGY or PSYCHOLOGY ?, posted by Scott L. Schofield on April 10, 2000, at 12:53:06
SLS,
Feeling flamed is a matter of perspective. My intent is not, by any means to flame or to play tennis.My life is as much at risk as those of people here claiming this diagnosis or that, and perhaps much more at risk because of my own distance from the social norm, and because I make noise about my distance.
You are correct that it is nearly impossible to broach any linguistic construct without ultimately discussing philosophy. The only way we can avoid discussion the broaches philosophy in a discussion of science is to accept someone elses authority reagarding philosphic slant. If we are smart enought to use computers and to discuss the neurchemistry of meds, we are probably smart enough to consider philosophic implications of our positions.
The mind/body question might appear philosophical but is one that is widely discussed in the literature of science. Among materialisticly oriented scientists and among some spiritually oriented materialists, (there are such people, of pagan persuasions) mind cannot be seperated from body. Eco-pschologists are suggesting that mind, or the sense of self, must be extended to include environment and experience.
The inseparable relationship between biology and psychology is evident in the breadth and depth of the study of biological psychology.
If you feel individually attacked, it might be because you occupied a theoretical foxhole near the approach to this important field of study, biolical ecological psychology. My primary interest in psychology is in ecological psychology, and my critique of my more academically accomplished eco-psychology peers is that they are not embracing the field of biological psychology. Maybe I am over here with the wet brain and chemistry club training to better challenge my eco-psych peers.
Anyway, I read your "i surrender" post first, and, being an experienced combatant, was doubtful that you would be a very compliant prisoner. For my part, I admire spritited mental resistance and combativeness, so don't feel flamed just because the discussion is challenging.
To Karen B., yes, turning on and off the emotions, regardless of what some may say, is difficult. The point of psychopharmacology is to create chemical switches to accomplish the task, but the shear strength of emotion (limbic drives?) are such that chemicals alone can seldom resolve an individual's emotional conflict, much less our social conflict. God help us though if we were living through this highly artificial, constructed culture without the aid of meds.I would suggest, for the sake of considering where we are at as a society, to consider simply the question of noise. We are subjected to an increasing amount of sustianed noise, which, my guess is, causes us to make more GABA to suppress our natural urge to react to stimulus. More GABA likely means upregulation of GABA-sensitive synapses, and likely reactions by other networks of other neurotransmitters that act in symbiotic tension with GABA.
There are lots of studies that address the neurological and psychological reactions to sustained noise levels. Environmental psychology is collecting many of these studies.
My point is that there are a number of hard, wet-brain biological problems caused by envrionmental and experiential conditions unique to industrialized culture. Then , there are other such problems that are being solved by industrialized culture. For an individual, access to meds might be a godsend, but for a person concerned about the direction of culture as a whole, neurochemistry is an essential element of explaining the etiology of environmental and experiential injury, and chemicical fixes are not a sufficient answer to collectively resolve the problems.
One other word, chemicals work for those with the health insurance or income available to afford a pdoc and a scrip. For those who are somewhat more likely to be injured - poor folks in threatening communities, the option is to take poorly manufactured aminergic agents (cocaine, meth), to regulate their serotonint and dopamine with weed and opiates, or to get an education and try to find ways to both define the problem in precise terms through study, including that of biological psychology and social psychology.
Me, I am a guerilla student, and an amature scientist, and hopefully a field medic in the war on drugs. For whatever that is worth.
poster:Cptn. boB
thread:29296
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20000401/msgs/29539.html