Nov 24, 2019, 11:41 AM
(important) (read this)
—”is there any smaller sphere in which you think psychoanalysis is an appropriate method or inquiry? (ie, hopefully the one it is intended for – personal therapy rather than public argumentation).”— Gerard
I think that it is always better to use this series:
- Means: Personality traits and reward systems. (anglo/physical)
- Cause: Acquisitionism and Propertarianism.(masculine/objective)
- Training: Stoicism (Acquisition of virtues by CBT)
- Affect(Heroic): Jungian ( Archetypes as proxies for traits) (german, sympathetic)
Defect:(Victim)Freudian Analysis (feminine conformity) (Jewish feminine)
This series begins with the most precise but least experiential and moves to the least precise but must experiential.
Personally I would prefer, that we use the above series just like the series math, physics, chemistry, biology, cooperation (sentience/economics), speech (negotiation), that we all knew the hierarchy of those from the most physical to the most experiential, and as such that we understood how each expresses a more fictional but more experiential grammar as we proceed down that list.
This series is as important as:
1. The hierarchy of Measurements (mathematics)
2. The hierarchy of States of Matter (physical science)
3. The hierarchy of Grammars (language)
4. The hierarchy of Knowledge (aristotelian categories)