From: Andrew Phelps <dis_course@yahoo.com>

To: psysr-humanrights@googlegroups.com

Date: Friday, March 16, 2012, 8:47 AM

Subject: Re: [PsySR-humanrights] Protecting Psychologists Who Harm: The APA's Latest Wrong Turn

 

Hi

I am not happy with this choice of locution. I would frame the situation in a more positive manner. There is the "wrong arrangement" of the politics of the APA, and there is by contrast the concern for embracing the advocacy of "the science of mind." Historically there is one "fix" which is the creation of divisions with integrity" and apparently a "deeper fix" is now needed.

On Wed, 3/14/12, Oqs wrote:

However, outside our group and a few select others, they would not know a carnival barker from a Goldman-Sachs banker prior to the crash. Let's start calling the Carnival Barker what it is: "Self Selected" in all writings and articles that reach out to the public and those not connected with us.

That would be a rhetorical flourish ("sneer") which does not speak in a positive manner to the advocacy for a "science of mind."

We hear:

Thanks for this locution. It is a "Self-Appointed" task force with an implied, but unnamed, constituency.

Presumably that judgment is informed by the opinion(s) of national security officers, using the guarded language of "implied, but unnamed" - no doubt it's "good judgment" from the frame of their polity. The term "constituency" indicates that in fact we are dealing with an advocacy rather than with a "personal joy ride." I indicated in a previous post that I believe that "advocacy" to be engaging the issue of "compliance" rather than the formally expressed issue of APA engagement with torture. I agree with the thrust of Roy's article and that that advocacy engages a "wrong turn" - where I disagree is in the view that that advocacy should be "sneered" at and that its actual content should not be critically engaged.

At the 2007 S.F. APA, my colleagues and I worked collaboratively with the Coalition for an Ethical APA. The Coalition helped organize a "mini-conference" along with a group of "Social" divisions. We put on a theatrical rendition on the street-corner: Our skit is online HERE. The issues raised by Roy's article are too important to be diverted by this negative engagement with (what I understand to be) the behavior management agenda by way of which the APA has set up this "Task Force."

 

ABO "Andrew Behavior Object"