Remythologizing culture: Narrativity, justification, and the politics of personalization

Abstract

The thesis that the self is a story unfolding in prescriptive space is typically embraced by social constructionists as a radical alternative to naturalistic accounts of human development. Yet, the Tree of Knowledge (ToK) System proposed by Henriques (2003) implies that events at multiple levels of analysis (i.e., matter, life, mind, and culture) can be considered as conditions of possibility for the emergence of meaningful personal narratives. Thus, the ToK System represents an opportunity to recast the work of naturalists and social constructionists in a framework that is at once scientific and humanistic.

A New Unified Theory of Psychology

“…In contrast, the human psychologists are concerned with human behavior at the individual and small group levels. These theorists and researchers are concerned with what Quackenbush (2005) calls the cultural person-as-a-whole and study developmental, personality, and social psychology. Their identities should be of social scientists because in addition to being grounded in the basic science of psychology, they also need to understand the impact of culture, human social systems, and language on thought and behavior.…”

“…In accordance with Quackenbush's (2005Quackenbush's ( , 2008 interpretation of the Justification Hypothesis, natural scientists, social scientists, and humanists alike need to articulate their core justifications because the effective building of justification systems inevitably includes value-based components and implications. In that regard, I am offering the unified theory because I sincerely believe it offers pathways toward human betterment.…”

“…For example, Rorty (1998b) questioned the need for consilience and instead argued that the various academic disciplines are functioning just fine. Indeed, many reviewers with different epistemological leanings questioned the need for unity and others strongly objected to Wilson's derisive dismissal of any and all forms of postmodernism or relativism and his general denigration of philosophy (e.g., Quackenbush, 2005).…”

“…However, once this initial observation is specified, it remains that the traditional distinction between the natural and social sciences can be readily understood via the ToK System. From the vantage point of the ToK, the physical, biological sciences and the disciplines that make up psychological formalism (e.g., the cognitive, behavioral, and neurosciences, see Henriques, 2004) would make up the natural sciences, whereas, human psychology (e.g., personality, social, human developmental psychology) would be merged with the rest of the human sciences (e.g., anthropology, sociology, economics) to make up the social sciences (see also Quackenbush, 2005). The reason for the division of these two domains of psychology is explained in detail in Chapter 7.…”

A new vision for the field: Introduction to the second special issue on the unified theory

“…Shaffer offers an incisive review of relevant research from sociology and demonstrates that the JH organizes and clarifies much of the research in that discipline. Then, Quackenbush (2005) effectively articulates some of the core concerns of postmodern philosophy and shows how the JH and the ToK System can address those concerns while also being commensurate with the natural sciences. He writes, "The ToK System represents an Archimedean perch from which it is possible to assume our freedom as psychologists.…”