Your comments on the differences between SCAN and Adlerian Psychology were interesting. And to apply your observations to another related area, they are a good argument for outlawing psychological testimony in court trials. Such testimony corrupts psychology by perverting its purpose and short circuits justice by allowing testimony that is irrelevant to the factual truth of an accusation. Even liars tell the truth, sometimes. The fact that psychological testimony may sometimes agree with a verdict misses the point. Astrology hits the target once in a while,too. On the other hand, there is a very good place for psychology in the understanding of criminal behavior and its prevention and making recommendatons at the penalty phase of the trial; but the question of quilt or innocense is(and should remain, in my opinion) a factual question. Pscychology is an art, not a science. Of course, its goal is to become a science, and hopefully it will some day, but right now, it is not.
Replies:
|
| Behavior OnLine Home Page | Disclaimer |
Copyright © 1996-2004 Behavior OnLine, Inc. All rights reserved.