History of Madness – Track 6

Professor Keirsey had his lecture course on Madness taped on cassettes in 1982.  This post is the sixth audio track.  Some parts of the lectures are missing.  But, more audio tracks will follow.

Track 1:  The beginning of History of Madness lecture course

He surveys the idea of madness “as far back as we can go”.  At the end of the course, he talks a little about his theory of madness: which he called at the time, “Wholistic Theory of Madness”  based social field theory and Temperament.

Once asked what was the most important thing he wanted people to get from his work, he said:

“I want people to understand that there is no such thing as madness.”

david_keirsey_in_library

Dr. David West Keirsey

Track 6:

The last part of elementalism
Role theory: Adler, Moreno, Sullivan, Kelly, Ellis, Berne
Programs, Drama, Game, Script, Lifeline

Eric Berne: Hydraulics and Electronic.  Robot Theory.

Elements cause behavior.  The person is programmed not relevant to the situation.  One flaw, the “crazy” is not listening to feedback.

Bateson, Haley

Wholistic Theory: opposite of elementalism.

There is a system: Gestalt.

No causal elements.  Polarity

Self Actualization – Kurt Goldstein

Changing and staying the same.  Self distribution.  Self regulation.

Elementalists
Tape recording (Elron Hubbard – never abandoned metaphor )

The elementalists [Freud, Jung, Adler, etc.] never decoded their metaphors into things you can see.  “Freud’s fiction”  Attractor elements, Integrator elements.

Posted in The History of Madness | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

History of Madness – Track 5

Professor Keirsey had his lecture course on Madness taped on cassettes in 1982.  This post is the fifth audio track.  More audio tracks will follow.

Track 1:  The beginning of History of Madness lecture course

He surveys the idea of madness “as far back as we can go”.  At the end of the course, he talks a little about his theory of madness: which he called at the time, “Wholistic Theory of Madness”  based social field theory and Temperament.

Once asked what was the most important thing he wanted people to get from his work, he said:

“I want people to understand that there is no such thing as madness.”

david_keirsey_in_library

Dr. David West Keirsey

Track 5:

Revolutions: slow ideas in Science.
Why people hold on to old fast ideas, and attack the new slow idea.

Kretschmer, Shapiro, Angel.  Madness in Character.  Rausch.  Disorders of Communication.

Penultimate Step: Haley

Erickson, Bateson, Haley.  Scapegoat and the “Schizophrenic”

Madness is hypnotic. [Fear is hypnotic]  Strategies in Psychotherapy.

Wholism:  Hegel  Law of Reciprocity, the death of Gestalt Psychology – Max Wertheimer, Kurt Lewin, Kurt Koffka, Wolfgang Kohler.  Ernst Cassirer, Raymond Holder Wheeler and Francis Theodore Perkins.

Wholism: is Not elementalism.

Elementalism in “psychology”
Freud, … , Skinner

Track 5 Audio

Track 6

Posted in The History of Madness, theory | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

History of Madness – Track 3-4

Professor Keirsey had his lecture course on Madness taped on cassettes in 1982.  This post is the fourth (there was no third)  audio track.  More audio tracks will follow.

Track 1:  The beginning of History of Madness lecture course

He surveys the idea of madness “as far back as we can go”.  At the end of the course, he talks a little about his theory of madness: which he called at the time, “Wholistic Theory of Madness”  based social field theory and Temperament.

Once asked what was the most important thing he wanted people to get from his work, he said:

“I want people to understand that there is no such thing as madness.”

david_keirsey_in_library

Dr. David West Keirsey

Track 3-4:

The revolting Freud.  Madness is defensive.

“These strange antics were seen as functional.  The mad act had a job to do.  It served a purpose. It had an end. It was manufactured by the person to accomplish something.”  …

“This behavior makes sense. … It’s a message.  … The reason is to protect ourselves.” …

“Do we protect ourselves, this consciously, …?  No, It’s all unconscious.”

“People do crazy things to protect themselves.”
— Dr. David West Keirsey

Freud added that defensive behavior was to protect the “libido.”

The steps toward the Wholistic Theory of Madness.

Adler: Defense of Pride (Self-Esteem, Self-Regard).  The start of the social theory of madness.  Kretschmer: Schizophrenic and Cyclothymic.  Sheldon.  Character theory of madness.

Bateson and Haley: Toward a Theory of Schizophrenia.  Social field theory of Madness.

Track 5

Posted in The History of Madness | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

History of Madness – Track 2

Professor Keirsey had his lecture course on Madness taped in 1982.  This post is the second audio track.  More audio tracks will follow.

Track 1:  The beginning of History of Madness lecture course

He surveys the idea of madness “as far back as we can go”.  At the end of the course, he talks a little about his theory of madness.

Once asked what was the most important thing he wanted people to get from his work, he said:

“I want people to understand that there is no such thing as madness.”

david_keirsey_in_library

Track 2:  Witches and Sorcerers. 17th century the advent of Mesmerism. Somnambulism, 19th century. The belief of illness.  The idea of suggestion.  Hypnotism.  The Classifiers.  Greeklish.  Bad Organs.

Track 3-4

Posted in The History of Madness | Tagged , , , | 1 Comment

The History of Madness — Track 1

Professor Keirsey had his lecture course on Madness taped in 1982.  This is the first audio track.  More audio tracks will follow.

He surveys the idea of madness “as far back as we can go”.  At the end of the course, he talks a little about his theory of madness.

Once asked what was the most important thing he wanted people to get from his work, he said:

“I want people to understand that there is no such thing as madness.”

david_keirsey_in_library

History of Madness, Track 2

Posted in The History of Madness | Tagged , , , , , | 1 Comment

The Premise

“The history of philosophy is to a great extent that of a certain clash of human temperaments. Undignified as such a treatment may seem to some of my colleagues, I shall have to take account of this clash and explain a good many of the divergences of philosophers by it. Of whatever temperament a professional philosopher is, he tries, when philosophizing, to sink the fact of his temperament. Temperament is no conventionally recognized reason, so he urges impersonal reasons only for his conclusions. Yet his temperament really gives him a stronger bias than any of his more strictly objective premises. It loads the evidence for him one way or the other, making for a more sentimental or hard-hearted view of the universe, just as this fact or that principle would. He trusts his temperament. Wanting a universe that suits it, he believes in any representation of the universe that does suit it. He feels men of opposite temper to be out of key with the world’s character, and in his heart considers them incompetent and ‘not in it,’ in the philosophic business even though they may far excel him in dialectical ability.” — William James

Like William James and his colleagues “in the philosophic business,” we “trust our temperament,” and “want a universe that suits it.” But also like his philosophic colleagues, when we interact with our colleagues, we try “to sink the fact” of our temperament. But, alas, and again like James’ colleagues, our temperament gives us “a stronger bias” than our “objective premises.” Yet more, we are prone to look upon those differing from us in being “of opposite temper” as “out of key.”

Though we may prefer to be seen as “objective” by pointing to “this fact or that principle” as our reason for pursuing a particular agenda, our temperament inexorably inclines us toward using particular methods to achieve particular results.

Posted in Introduction | Tagged , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Rational Maverick

Originally posted on Please Understand Me:

In Memoriam

It is the first anniversary of my father’s death.

david_keirsey_in_libraryProfessor David West Keirsey
(August 31, 1921 – July 30, 2013)

I always imagined that Paradise will be some kind of library — Luis Jorge Borges

I was born into even a better paradise.  My father was wordmeister (a studier of words) and a personologist (a studier of persons), and a book reader: A Rational Maverick.  And I was just like him — well sorta’.  He was born in the 20’s and I was born in the 50’s.  Two ages of innocence:  he after WWI and me after WWII.

He had different upbringing than me, but we were of the same Temperament (Rational), Role (Engineer) and Type (Architect).  A kind of a natural science and engineering type of person: a nerd, in modern argot. I naturally graviated towards being a scholar in quantitative reasoning and the use of words

View original 1,183 more words

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment