Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T14:34:27.920Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Parallogic: As Mind Meets Context

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 April 2024

Barbara Gail Hanson
Barbara Gail Hanson*
Affiliation:
University of Waterloo
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Parallogic models the relationship between mind and context. It, as does the excerpt above, suggests that systems of logic are context specific and therefore parallel. This model points out that perceived departures in mental process, reasoning, may be more apparent than real. It also suggests a new way to conceive of mental illness by separating breakdowns in mental process from shifts in mental process.

Type
Research Article
Information
Diogenes , Volume 37 , Issue 147 , September 1989 , pp. 77 - 91
Copyright
Copyright © 1989 Fédération Internationale des Sociétés de Philosophie / International Federation of Philosophical Societies (FISP)

Footnotes

*

I am thankful for discussions with Norman W. Bell, Melvin J. Lerner, Amy Tyson and John S. Strauss which helped me to develop my ideas. To the best of my knowledge this is the first usage of the term “parallogic”. T. Lidz used the word “paralogic” but in a different sense, as is discussed in the body of this paper. I use two “1's” to capture the sense of parallel logic as non-meeting systems.

References

Agnew, N.M. and Brown, J.L., “Bounded rationality: fallible decisions in unbounded decision space“, Behavioral Science, 1986, 31, 148–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Busino, G., “Sociology in Crisis”, Diogenes, No. 135, Fall 1986, 79–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carrol, L., Alice's Adventures in Wonderland, New York, Bantam Books, Inc., 1981 (Bantam Classic edition).Google Scholar
Coulson, J., et. al., eds., Oxford Illustrated Dictionary, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1975.Google Scholar
Dell, P.F., “Why do we still call them 'paradoxes?’“, Family Process, 1986, 25(2), 223–234.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Emerson, R.M. and Messinger, S.L., “The micro-politics of trouble“, Social Problems, 1977, 25(2), 121–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fischer, R., “Deconstructing reality“, Diogenes, Spring 1985, number 129, 47–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fischer, R. “Emergence of mind from brain: the biological roots of the hermeneutic circle”, Diogenes, Summer 1987, number 138, 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frischknecht, F., “Dialogue on informatic philosophy of behavioral sciences: positivist bias misses the symbol-system point“, Behavioral Science, 32, 1987, 234–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamburger, J., “The Art of Reasoning in Biology and Medicine”, Diogenes, Summer 1987, number 138, 26–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanson, B.G., “Definitional Deficit: A Model of Senile Dementia in Context”, forthcoming, Family Process, 28, 1989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laing, R.D., “Mystification, confusion, and conflict”, in Boszormenyi-Nagy, I. and Framo, J.L. eds. Intensive Family Therapy, American Medical Association, 1965, reprinted in Sluzki, C.E. and Ransom, D.C. eds., Double bind: The Foundation of the Communicational Approach to the Family, New York, Grune & Stratton, 1976, 199–218.Google Scholar
Laing, R.D. and Esterson, A., Sanity, Madness and the Family, Markham, Penguin Books Canada Ltd., 1980 (first edition 1964).Google Scholar
Laszlo, E., Introduction to Systems Philosophy, New York, Gordon and Breach, Science Publishers, 1972.Google Scholar
Lidz, T., The Family and Human Adaptation, New York, International Universities Press, 1963.Google Scholar
Mead, G.H., Morris, C., ed., Mind, Self and Society, Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1962 (first edition appeared in 1936).Google Scholar
Pollner, M., and McDonald-Wikler, L., “The Social Construction of Unreality: A Case Study of a Family's Attribution of Competence to a Severely Retarded Child”, Family Process, 24, 1985, 241–254.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Reiss, D., The Family's Construction of Reality, Cambridge, Ma., Harvard University Press, 1981.Google Scholar
Satir, V., “A family of angels: an interview with Virginia Satir”, in Haley, J. and Hoffman, L., Techniques of Family Therapy, New York, Basic Books Inc., 1967.Google Scholar
Selvini-Pallazoli, M., Paradox and Counterparadox, New York, Jason Aronson, 1978.Google Scholar
Strauss, J.S., “Mediating processes in schizophrenia: Towards a new dynamic psychiatry “, British Journal of Psychiatry, 1989, 155 (suppl. 5), 22–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
V, H., “ On constructing a reality”, In Watzlawick, P., ed., The Invented Reality, New York, W.W. Norton and Company, 1984, 41–62.Google Scholar
V, E., “ An introduction to radical constructivism”, in Watzlawick, P., ed., The Invented Reality, New York, W.W. Norton and Company, 1984, 17–40.Google Scholar
Watzlawick, P., Beavin, J.H., Jackson, D.D., Pragmatics of Human Communication, New York, W.W. Norton & Company Inc., 1967.Google Scholar