Posting on Grouptalk

[Moreno]

Dr Peter C Howie
Sent from my iPhone

> On 18 Sep 2021, at 8:48 am, cartmel at alphalink.com.au wrote:
> 
> 
> Hi Rollo – Walter – Peter - Group
> regarding the 1940 article quote …...
> Objectification of himself by the patient can also be accomplished by means of the 'reversal' 
> technique. 
> The patient is asked to place himself in the role of someone in his social atom, and an 
> auxiliary ego--or the actual person whom the patient is to portray, if possible--is placed In the role 
> of the 
> patient.
> The first issue at stake here is the one of - ‘near’ and ‘far’ sociometry - JLM wrestled with and never 
> got to 
> resolve.
> But, as much as I can discern,  your dialogue to date relates to another and deeper issue – that of 
> the 
> place of the  ‘individual’ in the modern mind where the individual is terrorized by the group. 
> A new reformulation of Aristotle’s dialectic of – the one versus the many. We see this with Trump 
> trying to 
> make the ONE usa great again by activating the unrulily mob.  Trump can not see the 
> irony of his mob terrorizing the one speaker of the house. 
> 
> Here is a 2006 quote from Boltanski.
> F. A. Hayek's Scientism and the Study of Society offers a particularly trenchant formulation of these 
> critiques. The author contrasts "method-ological individualism" with a "scientistic approach 
> treating as facts those collectives which are no more than popular generalizations" --or, as he puts it 
> later 
> on, "vague popular theories" (1952, 38, 54). To dismantle the totalist (collectivist) 
> prejudice, he borrows the terms in which Charles Vic-tor Langlois and Charles Seignobos 
> formulated their 
> critique of sociology: "[I]n the imagination as in direct observation, [collective acts] 
> always re-duce to a sum of individual actions. The 'social fact,' as recognized by certain sociologists, 
> is a 
> philosophical construction, not a historical fact" (210-11 n. 29). 
> 
> This is the issue for the auxiliary and protagonist reversing roles. Are they reversing [inverting 
> identity] 
> with a ‘sociological identity’ or a ‘phenomenon standing’ before them? A specific or a 
> generalization? A near or far ‘thing’? A social construct conserve or an emergent person?
> Hope this assists.
> Brendan Cartmel
> Integral Socionomy
> Mob:0427560724
> 
> ----- End forwarded message -----
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Grouptalk mailing list
> List at grouptalkweb.org
> http://grouptalkweb.org/mailman/listinfo/list_grouptalkweb.org