w2: Things & Kinds Flashcards
Scientific Discourse
Scientific discourse refers to how psychological concepts, theories, and methods are discussed, constructed, and debated in the scientific community.
It is not limited to phenomena (ontological concerns) or knowledge production (epistemological issues) but also addresses how these are conceptualised and articulated (meta-ontology and conceptualisation).
Example: The debate on the nature of consciousness in psychology, whether it is a biological process or an emergent phenomenon.
Conceptual Analysis
Conceptual analysis in psychology involves critically examining and deconstructing concepts to understand their meaning, usage, and implications within a scientific framework.
Example: Analysing “intelligence” to determine whether it reflects a fixed trait or an emergent set of cognitive abilities shaped by environment.
Knowledge Production
This refers to the processes by which new psychological insights and theories are developed, validated, and shared, often shaped by epistemological and methodological approaches.
Example: Using experimental methods to study the effects of therapy on anxiety and publishing the results in peer-reviewed journals.
Overton’s Nested Levels of Scientific Discourses
metatheories, theories, and empirical observations:
provides a framework for understanding how different layers of scientific inquiry interact, from foundational ideas to concerte observations.
- metatheories: foundational worldviews
the broadest, most abstract frameworks guiding how science is conducted
- metatheories define the epistemological and ontological assumptoms - middle-range theories: practival frameworks
bridge metatheories and empirical observations by refining broad principles into specific, testable frameworks.
- explains particular phenomena - empirical obervation: data and evidence
here, hypotheses derived from middle-range theories are tested through experiemnts, obeservations or data collection.
Key characteristics of Overton’s approach:
Relational Complementarity, paradigmatic differences, conceptual analysi
- Relational Complementarity: Overton stresses that empirical data and theoretical concepts are interdependent. Neither should be seen as dominant but as complementary.
- Paradigmatic Differences: contrast b/w two foundational paradigidms.
- cartesian mechanistic paradigm- focus on reductionism viewing mental process as isolated mechanical system
- process-relational pradigm- emphasis on interconnectedness viewing psychological processes as dynamic - Inclusion of Conceptual Analysis: Conceptual clarity is integral, ensuring theories are built on robust ontological and epistemological foundations.
- ie. without rubust conceptual frameworks, theories might misinterpret or oversimplify complex phenomena such as reducing mental health issues to purely biological factors
Moon & Blackman Framework
ontology, epistemology, philosophical perspectives
**Moon & Blackman **present a guide for understanding social science research, with a focus on philosophy’s role in shaping scientific inquiry. Their framework identifies:
- Ontology (what exists): They contrast realism and relativism, outlining how assumptions about reality influence research design.
- Epistemology (how we know): Objectivism, constructionism, and subjectivism are presented as positions that frame knowledge acquisition.
- Philosophical Perspectives: These include positivism, interpretivism, and critical theory, which guide the methodological approach of research
Comparison Overton, Moon&Blackman
Integration Focus:
Overton: Integrates conceptual and empirical components within nested discourses, creating a continuum from metatheories to observations.
Moon & Blackman: Emphasise interdisciplinary collaboration by clarifying differences between natural and social sciences using ontology, epistemology, and philosophy.
Paradigms and Perspectives:
Overton: Explores the structure and interaction of paradigms, aligning with philosophical perspectives like positivism and critical realism.
Moon & Blackman: Offer broader tools for understanding philosophical assumptions shaping research.
Relativism vs. Realism:
Overton: Incorporates process-relational paradigms, aligning with constructivist epistemologies.
Moon & Blackman: Explicitly contrast realist and relativist ontologies, linking them to conservation research applications.
Empirical Observations:
Overton: Views empirical data as shaped by theory and metatheory, rejecting purely inductive methods.
Moon & Blackman: Focus on interpreting empirical data in interdisciplinary contexts.
Psychological Essentialism
Psychological essentialism is the belief that certain traits or categories have an underlying “essence” that defines their identity and behavior.
Example: Believing that aggression is an inherent trait caused by biological factors like testosterone.
Essence is thought to be visible by someone’s category membership (ie. Kinds): things that look similar share similar (abstract) qualities.
Latent Traits: Essences & Indicators
Latent traits are unobservable characteristics inferred from measurable behaviors or outcomes.
Essence: The inherent quality (e.g., intelligence).
Indicators: Observable behaviors that reflect the essence (e.g., problem-solving skills).
Example: Measuring intelligence through IQ tests.
Personality and Essentialism (psych)
traits as essence: personality traits viewed as stable, inherent tendencies that explain regularities in behaviour+ cognition.
observable indicators: traits inferre from consistent observable behaviours + emotional patterns.
- seen as manifestations of essence
causality: essentialism assumes circular causality
Personality traits cause behaviours.
Observed behaviours are then used as evidence for the presence of those traits.
Example: A person is considered “kind” because they help others, and their helping behaviour is explained by their “kindness.”
types of essence
Non-specific & Specific Essences
Non-specific: Broad constructs like motivation or unconscious drives.
Specific: Tangible biological factors like genes or hormones.
**Example: **Aggression might stem from a non-specific essence (motivation) or specific essence (testosterone).
Essence and Kinds
- The way entities are grouped into distinct categories or kinds based on the assumption that they share a common underlying essence.
- Reflects the belief that entities with the same kind possess similar traits.
essences and kinds relate to the categorisation and explanation of psychological traits, behaviours, and identities. These concepts explore whether psychological “kinds” (e.g., intelligence, personality types) are rooted in shared, immutable essences and how these categories influence understanding and research.
Kinds definition
Definition: Categories or groups that are defined based on shared essences.
Psychological kinds include constructs like personality traits (e.g., extraversion), mental health disorders (e.g., depression), or cognitive abilities.
core features of kinds and essence
Shared Ontology:
Members of a kind (e.g., individuals diagnosed with depression) are thought to share an underlying reality or essence (e.g., a specific neurochemical imbalance).
Immutability:
**
Essentialism often implies that the essence of a kind is stable and unchanging, suggesting that traits or disorders are biologically or fundamentally determined.
Exclusiveness:
Members of one kind are distinct from members of other kinds. For example, someone with high extraversion is categorically different from someone with high introversion.
Inductive Potential:
If a kind is based on shared essences, researchers assume that studying one member of the kind can generalise to others, leading to broader insights.
Essentialism and Determinism:
Essentialism in psychology often aligns with deterministic views, suggesting that traits or behaviours are fixed by biology or social forces.
Determinism: builds on essentialism by focusing on the causative nature of essences. It posits that:
1. traits and behaviours are predetermined
2. traits are fixed- the origin of a trait (biological or social) locks the individual into specific behaviour
Bio- and Social Determinism
Biological Determinism: Attributes psychological traits to genetic or neurological essences (e.g., intelligence as determined by brain size or genetic inheritance).
- trait caused by biological factors
Social Determinism: Attributes traits to fixed social constructs or identities (e.g., gender roles being unchangeable due to cultural norms).
- trait shaped by socal influences and environment
critique essentialism and determinism
both essentialism and determinism have been criticised for their reductionist view, which ignores the dynamic interplay of multiple influences and the role of context in shaping behaviour.
Substance Ontology
Reductionism: observable indicators are due to causal essence (trait).
Essence is an object (ie. Reification through the use of nouns, Billing)
- From a substance approach then, to understand something means to grasp its underlying, permanent, independent, and universal essence.
Views entities as fixed, with inherent, unchanging essences.
ie. personality is fixed
Process Ontology (Nicholas Rescher)
Sees entities as dynamic, evolving systems influenced by context and time.
part of substance ontology
Reductionism & Objectification (Reification)
Reductionism:
Simplifies complex psychological processes into their basic components, often ignoring the broader context or interactions.
In psychology, this might mean reducing mental states or behaviours solely to biological or neurological processes.
Objectification (Reification):
Treats abstract concepts, such as intelligence or emotions, as if they were concrete, independent entities, ignoring their relational or contextual nature.
This process can misrepresent dynamic phenomena as fixed or static “things.”
characteristics
Features of process ontology
- processes are sequential (iterative): sequence of events, causality or conditionality b/w events
- occur in sequence, each event affects the next. (t, t+1, t+2..) - processes have subjects: individuals who actively participate in and shape these dynamic phenomena.
- not a passive entity but an active participant in their own development or psychological processes. - Embeddedness in dynamic context: Processes are embedded in dynamic contexts, including social, environmental, and temporal factors.
- Psychological phenomena are inseparable from their context; - Processes are action-based: Focuses on actions and relationships rather than static traits.
Example: Instead of viewing “intelligence” as a fixed trait, process ontology examines how cognitive abilities emerge through learning and adaptation. - Processes have temporal properties: Processes unfold over time, with different stages or phases. Psychological processes, such as behavioural change or mental health recovery, cannot be fully understood without considering their temporal dimension
- Time-scale (micro-meso-macro): Processes operate across multiple interconnected time scales, from momentary interactions to lifelong trajectories.
Micro-Scale: Short-term processes- decision-making or momentary emotional reactions.
Meso-Scale: Mid-level processes- navigating a relationship over month or years
Macro-Scale: Long-term processes, such as personality development or the impact of cultural shifts on identity.
Rescher’s Principles: Change & Stability (process ontology)
- change: change is necessary for a process. Change is the fundamental driver of processes. A process cannot exist without ongoing dynamic interactions and transitions.
2.stability: Stability (at one time scale) emerges from processes of change and dynamics at a smaller time scale.
- Stable traits or behaviours (e.g., personality or emotional balance) emerge from continuous micro-level processes operating at smaller time scales.
^^things appear to be stable because it is changing at a slow time scale-
process ontology
Systems: Internal & external components
concept of systems highlights the interconnected nature of psychological phenomena.
Internal Components
Definition: Processes or structures within the individual that contribute to psychological phenomena.
- These include neural mechanisms, cognitive schemas, and emotional regulation processes.
External Components
Definition: Environmental or social factors that interact with internal components and influence psychological systems.
- These include cultural norms, social interactions, physical environments, and educational contexts.
ie. memory
internal = neural activity in hippocampus and prefrontal cortex
external = educational context, social environmetn - encouragement during learning
process ontology: systems internal and external
Causation: Component vs. Interaction Dominant
Component-Dominant Causation
Definition: Attributes causation to a specific, isolated component or factor within a system.
- aligns with reductionist view
- focus on singular cause such as genes
ie. Example:
Depression might be explained by a specific genetic mutation or a neurochemical imbalance (e.g., serotonin deficiency).
**Interaction-dominant causation: **
Definition: Emphasises that causation arises from the interactions between components within a system, rather than any single component.
- multiple factors (internal and external) interact to produce outcomes.
- aligns with process ontology
Example:
Depression might result from gene-environment interactions, such as a genetic predisposition activated by chronic stress.
A person’s biology, life experiences, social support, and cultural context interact dynamically to shape the manifestation of depression.
process ontology
Process Causality
psychological phenomena as emerging from dynamic, ongoing interactions and changes over time, rather than being the result of static or isolated causes.
key features:
- Dynamic Interactions: psychological phenomena as a resut of interaction b/w internal and external factors.
- Temporal Dimension: Change happens over time, with past interactions influencing present states and shaping future outcomes
- Emergent Outcomes: Phenomena are emergent, meaning they arise from the interplay of components in a system and cannot be reduced to any single cause.
Being vs. Becoming
Being: Focuses on static states or traits.
Becoming: Emphasises development and change.
Example: Viewing intelligence as a fixed trait (being) versus an evolving ability (becoming).
Being vs. Becoming
Being: Focuses on static states or traits, assuming that certain characteristics (e.g., intelligence, personality) are fixed and unchanging.
Becoming: Emphasises dynamic processes, highlighting how traits and behaviours develop, evolve, and change over time in response to internal and external influences.
Epistemic Humility
Acknowledges the limits of our understanding and avoids absolute claims about psychological phenomena.
Example: Accepting that intelligence tests measure a construct but may not capture all aspects of human intelligence.
types of kinds (Kendler)
concept of “kinds” refers to how we categorise psychological phenomena, such as mental disorders, traits, or behaviours. Kendler’s models outline different ways to conceptualise these kinds, each with its own philosophical and practical implications.
- essential kinds
- social constructions
- practical kinds
- mechanic property cluster
Kendler: essential kinds
defined by a single essence shared by all members
- intrinsic, immutable properties shared by all members of the category.
+ve = simple and explainatory for static categories
-ve = oversimplifies complex, dynamic phenomena
ie. depression seen as rooted in specific biological essence (- seretonin)
Kendler: Socially constructed kinds
shaped by societal, cultural, or historical norms.
These categories are not fixed but emerge from shared societal understandings.
+ve = highlights variability and contextual influences
-ve= can ignore universal or biological factors
Kendler: Practical Kinds
focus on utility rather than intrinsic truths
defined by their usefulness for addressing real-world problems, regardless of whether they represent objective or socially constructed realities.
+ve = functional for diagnosis and intervention
-ve = limited theoretical depth and fails to address causation
process ontology
Kendler: MPC Kinds
(Mechanic property cluster)
MPC kinds conceptualise psychological phenomena as clusters of properties that are connected through causal relationships but do not depend on a fixed essence.
+ve = comprehensive and aligns with modern scientific understanding
-ve = complex to study and operationalise
Essences and Defining Features
Essences:
An essence is an intrinsic property that defines a kind.
Assumes all members of a kind share an unchanging, underlying cause or mechanism.
In psychology: Disorders like schizophrenia are often assumed to have a core biological basis, such as a genetic mutation.
Defining Features:
Observable traits or symptoms resulting from the essence.
Example: In essentialist models, depression’s defining features (e.g., sadness, insomnia) are considered consequences of a single underlying cause like serotonin imbalance.
Kendler’s Conclusion
Integration of Models:
Practical kinds are useful for immediate applications, but psychiatric research should strive for MPC-based frameworks.
Aim: Identify patterns across individual symptom networks to ground classifications in causal mechanisms.
Philosophical Stance:
MPC and process ontology align with critical realism, acknowledging the reality of disorders while rejecting rigid, essentialist models.
Positivism
A philosophical approach emphasising that all knowledge must be based on observable phenomena and empirical data. Rejects metaphysical or speculative explanations.
principle: Knowledge is derived from sense experience and verified through observation or experimentation.
ie. Behaviourism: Focuses on observable behaviours rather than internal mental states (e.g., B.F. Skinner’s operant conditioning experiments).
-ve = Overlooks subjective experiences and unobservable phenomena,
Neo-Positivism (Logical Positivism/Logical Empiricism)
An evolved form of positivism that combines empirical data with logical analysis to clarify the meaning of scientific statements.
Core Principles:
Emphasis on verification: Statements must be empirically testable or analytically true (e.g., mathematical/logical truths).
Reductionism: Complex phenomena are reduced to observable, measurable components.
Focuses on language and meaning: Only meaningful statements are those that can be empirically verified or logically deduced.
ie. Intelligence testing: Logical positivism supports operational definitions of abstract concepts (e.g., defining intelligence by measurable IQ test performance).
-ve= Fails to account for the dynamic and relational nature of psychological phenomena
