Archive for February, 2019

Howard Gardner’s Theory of Multiple Intelligences

February 16, 2019

Next we examine (oh so superficially!) Howard Gardner’s Theory of Eight(-ish) Multiple Intelligences. To wit (ha-ha):

  • Intra-personal
  • Interpersonal
  • Bodily-kinesthetic
  • Nature-existential
  • Visual-spatial
  • Verbal-linguistic
  • Musical-rhythmic
  • Logical-mathematical

Further Reading:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_multiple_intelligences

https://www.tecweb.org/styles/gardner.html

http://www.institute4learning.com/resources/articles/multiple-intelligences/

Howard Gardner / Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences (1983)

Howard Gardner / Multiple Intelligences: The Theory in Practice (1993)

Howard Gardner / Multiple Intelligences: New Horizons in Theory and Practice (2006)

[*11.41]

<>

Erik Erikson’s Eight Stages of Psychosocial Development

February 12, 2019

Erik Erikson developed an eight stage developmental model of the psyche for the full life of the human individual. Each stage has a key conflict (with both positive and negative sides), its resolution into a “virtue,” and the typical age range for that conflict.

  • Trust vs. Mistrust, “Hope”, Infancy (0-1 years)
  • Autonomy vs. Shame, “Will”, Early Childhood (1-3 years)
  • Initiative vs. Guilt, “Purpose”, Play Age (3-5 years)
  • Industry vs. Inferiority, “Competency” (or “Ability” or “Skill”), Schooling (5-12 years)
  • Ego identity vs. Role confusion, “Fidelity”, Adolescence (12-18 years)
  • Intimacy vs. Isolation, “Love”, Young Adult (18-40 years)
  • Generativity vs. Stagnation, “Care”, Adulthood (40-65 years)
  • Ego integrity vs. Despair, “Wisdom”, Old Age (65-? years)

I would think that these ages would depend significantly on cultural norms.

Further Reading:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erikson%27s_stages_of_psychosocial_development

https://courses.lumenlearning.com/teachereducationx92x1/chapter/eriksons-stages-of-psychosocial-development/

https://www.simplypsychology.org/Erik-Erikson.html

http://www.crowe-associates.co.uk/psychotherapy/erikson-life-stages/

[*11.44]

<>

The Eight Circuit Model of Consciousness

February 7, 2019
Timothy Leary’s dead…
No, no-no, he’s outside, looking in…

— The Moody Blues

Timothy Leary came up with this scheme of eight circuits of consciousness and Robert Anton Wilson expanded and renamed most of them. It’s basically a “great-chain” of evolutionary brain circuitry, leading from lower to higher states of consciousness.

I’ve labeled my diagram with RAW’s names, but below I also list Leary’s names in parentheses.

  • Oral Bio-survival (Vegetative-invertebrate)
  • Anal Territorial (Emotional-locomotion)
  • Semantic Time-binding (Laryngeal-manual Symbolic)
  • Socio-sexual (Socio-sexual Domestication)
  • Neurosomatic (Neurosomatic)
  • Metaprogramming (Neuro-electric)
  • Morphogenetic (Neurogenetic)
  • Non-local Quantum (Neuro-atomic Metaphysiological)

Pretty wild stuff!

Further Reading:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eight-circuit_model_of_consciousness

https://web.archive.org/web/20110723133512/http://www.futurehi.net/docs/8circuit.html

http://www.phinnweb.org/neuro/8-circuit/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_Leary

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Anton_Wilson

[*11.42]

<>

John Beebe’s Eight Function Model

February 5, 2019

After my last post about an ad-hoc eightfold metaphysics, I spent a few minutes trying to create an eightfold psychology. Feeling insufficient to the task, I quickly put this aside and instead wondered if there was any prior work for this, and lo and behold, I found a wealth of such things. Eight seems to be a popular number for the enumeration of the psyche and related subjects.

I’ve already mentioned Robert Plutchik’s Emotions and Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi’s Flow, which are both sort of psychological dissections. If you’re into Jung and related psychologies, Jungian analyst John Beebe developed his eight-function model of personality types that blends Jungian concepts together into an interesting system. The eight types are split into two sets of four: for every type in the first “positive” set (ego-syntonic) there is a corresponding type in a “shadow” set (ego-dystonic). Each set of four has a superior, an auxiliary, a tertiary, and an inferior function.

  • Hero/Heroine (superior function)
  • Father/Mother (auxiliary function) (or good parent)
  • Puer/Puella (tertiary function) (or eternal child)
  • Anima/Animus (inferior function)
  • Opposing persona (shadow of superior) (villain?)
  • Senex/Witch (shadow of auxiliary) (or critical parent)
  • Trickster (shadow of tertiary) (added deceiver for balance)
  • Demon/Daimon (shadow of inferior) (daemon?)

In my diagram, I’ve shown each function paired with its shadow function. And of course being Jungian, the terminology is full of gender distinctions, which could fairly easily be eliminated. There are also lots of arcane associations to MBTI and such, so this will take more than a quick look. Please just wait here, and I’ll be back with an update soon (or not)!

Further Reading:

https://presentobsessions.wordpress.com/2013/12/03/the-john-beebe-8-function-model/

http://www.apt-nc.org/type-theories/eight-function-model/

http://www.erictb.info/archetypes.html

http://thedepthcoach.com/eight-function-model/

https://www.careerplanner.com/8CognitiveFunctions/Cognitive-Functions-Simply-Explained.cfm

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Beebe

Also see my posts:

https://equivalentexchange.blog/2011/08/26/carl-jungs-psychological-types/

https://equivalentexchange.blog/2018/09/07/the-myer-briggs-type-indicator/

[*11.41, *11.43]

<>

An Eightfold Metaphysics

February 1, 2019

If one juxtaposes the fourfold Space-Time-Matter-Energy with the fourfold Structure-Function-Part-Action, one sees that there are several relations between them. These are simple common-sense relations, not modern-physics types of relations. Below they are listed by Space-type relations and Time-type relations.

Space is required for the extension of Structures.
Matter constitutes Structures.
Parts in an arrangement make up Structures.

Structures extend and are organized in Space.
Matter is located in Space.
Parts occupy Space.

Time allows the expression of Functions.
Energy is required for the operation of Functions.
Actions in a sequence constitute Functions.

Functions have duration and reoccur in Time.
Energy requires and is dependent on Time.
Actions take place within Time.

Several analogies are also evident in this diagram.

  1. Space : Structures :: Time : Functions
  2. Space : Parts :: Time : Actions
  3. Space : Matter :: Time : Energy
  4. Structures : Parts :: Functions : Actions
  5. Structures : Matter :: Functions : Energy
  6. Parts : Matter :: Actions : Energy

Notice that analogies 1.-3. are “contains” relations, and 4.-6. are “part of” relations. One obtains the nesting of entities:

Structures > Parts > Matter
Functions > Actions > Energy

I suppose that any analogy could be shown in a figure like the one on the right (or even written as A / B // C / D) or with the two squares side by side, and that sets of four or six analogies that overlap could be nicely shown as above. If so, I wonder what can be gained by such representations? Probably individually not so much but with overlaps I think it would be interesting.

Further Reading:

The study of parts and wholes relations is called Mereology.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mereology

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/mereology/

[*11.26, *11.34]

<>


%d bloggers like this: