Patterns (behavioral patterns) are an organismic thing. They are there and they are important: they contain all else that is important -- as they would in a biological organism (in ANY of its functioning). Seeing things correctly involves seeing the patterns. What is the use of research that is so scant (in what it looks at and for) that you do not see or find these clear empirical organismic patterns (invariant in their key aspects or nature and which, again, must exist in any important functioning of a biological organism -- this is the kind of patterns I am talking about here)? ALL such have at least convincing indirect empirical relations to what is presently directly observable and some direct relation; anything important and of your interest would involve such patterns; how else could they (your behaviors of interest) BE PRESENT for the organism? And, you do believe in the environment, don't you? : key environmental aspects will be very much involved here, with the patternings -- perhaps much more so with the patterns than your particular behavior(s) of "interest". (AND, about these patterns: I mean actually see and record them in research plus understand parts that may be covert. BUT, included in what you see should be the present proximate cause -- so there is always some convincing proximate cause overtly PRESENT -- because that is the way it IS, if you are an empiricist; AND the patterns will help you find these.)
You really don't think that piece-meal research on 'particular behaviors' in different 'circumstances' will come together basically by themselves (though you seem to have such a hope for whatever behaviors and neuroscience -- that's more "bunk", when considered on the larger scale) *OR* do you think that you are "such a good theorist" (omnipotent ) that you can put it all together by presumption theory or spontaneous insight? To me, that is not only unlikely, but nonsense -- just look at psychology's history. The diverse theories we have now are not a help nor seen as such except by those who want meta-theories, bringing theories together -- and this ends up intuitive and diverse as well (I see it as trash on top of trash). Prove me wrong and we shall be transcending reality together (but actually only in arrogance and delusion).
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Mathematical Sciences
- Statistics
- Probability
- Probability Theory
- Reliability