anti-Causality


anti-Causality

Knowledge is a tree, not a conclusion, and it has been a tree for all of time. Sometime, however, it verboten in the Bible with a didactic “tale” apparently by oligarchs telling the average religious person to view the tree of knowledge and its information as verboten. This is the beginning of the limits and control of information necessary for oligarchic dominance, as opposed to capital-type control which is more commodity-based --though information is now a commodity as “intellectual property.” (With “intellectual” being a strong word for the slurry capital pumps into the population.)

The most important extension of this type of information control currently exists as academia with its early revival of control as the dialectic and didactic by academy founders Socrates and Plato in ancient Athens, and recently by Hegel to fit current capital. Important is that these instructors specifically used sexual abuse to control, which survived to our time as, for instance, the Aboriginal residence schools openly, and covertly elsewhere.

Causality is a rational reduction of the complexity of life saying that “if something happens in relation to something else, that something else caused the first thing.” As a rational reduction, it is a “dumbing-down” of all the highly sophisticade life-system that affect us. Knowledge is naturally structured both in society and in our minds in tree structures, also called “complex data structures” Personally, I have never been “causal” (I believe) because I have been influenced by aboriginal knowledge organization, and also abstract art and music early on as a child with access to all of New York’s museums and libraries (access has since been restricted to children.)

If I something is unavoidably causal, I say “simple math” --this causes that, w/o making a bid deal about it.

Empiricism is the scientific method (and system) built from causality and is considered the only (measurement) science, even by scientist who should know better. It suffers from being highly-fractured, as it is built from independent causal conclusions that also tend to be ego-vehicles from empiricist scientists. Another widely-misused term is “objective” as a synomym for “cruel” such that normal human thinking, such as the recollection of experiences, is excluded from empiricist conclusions; only empiricist numbers are used, often as an output of highly-purposed statistical systems. Dependance on statistics is such that statistics now often produce hypothesis and theory, that is validated by the same statistical systems. Information from other sources such as experience and observation, no matter how detailed, cannot test well against conclusive information produced specifically to test well by statistical systems. This statistical reality is most true for current control of the mind (both human and animal) in cognitive-behavioral strategies of CBT. Interestingly, in CBT, the dialectic method as the socratic method is also key for (as they say) “thought control.”

Objectivism, such as Ayn Rand’s and (current-capital’s) Adam Smith’s objectivism simply “objectify’s” people to make then inanimate numbers rather than feeling people to allow for capital exploitation. As it happens, capital-supporting empiricism, as info-oligarchic, also leverages this, and fills its capital-supportive role by defining and maintaining it as its own from of exploitation, originally sexual abuse.

Sunday, September 23, 2012

What is the difference between state and trait?

Here, I attempt to use material about a state-trait anger test, the STAXI-2, to describe state and trait in real terms that we can apply (Borteyrou, et al. 2008).  I chose anger because it is often a component of personality disorder (Varghese, et al. 2010), especially Borderline PD.

Trait anger is measured as temperament and reaction (Varghese, et al. 2010).  State anger is measured as angry feelings, verbal expression, and physical expression--or violence.  Trait here can be described as a personality construct that consists of cognitive and motivational factors that describe how a client thinks and what he believes; his thinking (state) may be distorted because of problems in the underlying constructs (traits) (Owen, 2011).  As construct implies permanence, a therapist would want to find ways to alter or replace those permanent constructs (traits), that, in turn, would improve behaviors (state).  Reconstruction of traits to provide better states (behaviors) is a way to describe the cognitive strategy of CBT.

Pharmacology seeks to manage traits as vulnerabilities and states as symptoms (Bellino, 2008).  This implies that a defective trait needs to be fixed by making it less vulnerable with medicine. Topiramate is an anticonvulsant that can be used to manage anger in Borderline PD clients, and especially shows improvement for trait anger using the STAXI-2 (Varghese, et al. 2010), implying that it makes the clients less "vulnerable" to angry outbursts.

References

Bellino, S., Paradiso, E., & Bogetto, F. (2008). Efficacy and Tolerability of Pharmacotherapies for Borderline Personality Disorder. CNS Drugs, 22(8), 671-692. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.

Borteyrou, X., Bruchon-Schweitzer, M., & Spielberger, C. D. (2008).  The French adaptation of the STAXI-2, C.D. Spielberger's State-trait anger expression inventory. Encephale. 34(3) (pp 249-255).

Owen, J. M. (2011). Transdiagnostic cognitive processes in high trait anger. Clinical Psychology Review.31(2) (pp 193-202). 

Varghese, B. S., Rajeev, A., Norrish, M., & Bin Mohammed Al Khusaiby, S. (2010). Topiramate for anger control: A systematic review. Indian Journal of Pharmacology. 42(3) (pp. 135–141).

No comments:

Post a Comment