I have been reading from the book “Turning Freud Upside Down” and read in the first chapter about the implications of naturalism for the study and practice of psychology. I do not remember the author’s names, but they describe that naturalism is the philosophy that all phenomena in the universe is governed by laws and that every event follows an antecedent cause. While I am most likely oversimplifying this philosophy and leaving out some key points, it is interesting that psychology rarely examines the paradoxes between research, theory, and practice. If naturalism were applied to psychology, then we would assume that all human actions are caused by antecedent events, and that human actions are predetermined. Naturalism in this sense seems contrary to free will, or the idea that if a human being makes a choice she could have had the option to choose otherwise. In the future I hope to write a formalized deductive argument in favor of naturalism, because as I have learned it is easiest to challenge the assumptions underlying commonly accepted points of view when they are broken down into their basic components.
rex on Extra Credito, “Waste… Mr WordPress on Hello world!