From: Andrew Phelps <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Re: [S-ACC] counter-intuitive
Date: Sunday, January 31, 2016 12:48 PM
The Institutional betrayal flyer now has preliminary form for Jennifer Freyd at De Anza College February 24: HERE
I'm pleased to work towards a "psychology" less based on "attitude management" (e.g. Philip Zimbardo) and more based on reaching to the "violence, abuse, and trauma" concerns at a grassroots level.
I sense that many involved with the Social Accountability perspective are doing individual and separate advocacies with parallel content.
We bring the practice of "understanding the mind" to the sensitivity required for engaging elements of social responsibility.
Similarly, the philosophical advocacy for "institutional betrayal" does not mean trusting the institution, rather that means embracing the institution's courage in being willing to change. Thus what happened last summer in the APA (psychology) leadership was often exhibited as their need for "political treatment" due to making excuses for "embracing torture" - yet courage to change is problematic. Our madness must needs transcend "pointing the finger" and then reach to those seeking for socially responsible change. We go as models of "good behavior" as people rather than as those who engage by way of rendering our version of "badness critique."
That approach puts our advocacy "in the driver's seat" and aligns us with those who already attempting to "do right" - our "madness" is good.