Modern science took off during the Enlightenment and changed    the world. Science was differedfrom philosophy in that    it did not presuppose how nature must be, as the    early philosophers tended to do, but instead scientists got up    out of their armchairs and asked questionsand gathered    data about howuniverse actually    behaved.Observation, measurement and experimentation    became the sine qua non of the scientific enterprise, and this    has continued into the present day.  
    Science has been so successful that philosophy has drifted into    the background, so much so that some scientists (e.g., E. O.    Wilson) have wondered if philosophy is even necessary. This    love of empiricism was    soaked up by scientific psychologists. In his popular Psych 101    text, David Myers states that the key word in psychologys    definition is science and that psychology is less a set of    findings than a way of asking and answering    questions,meaning that psychologists approach their    subject matter through the lens and methods of empirical    science.  
    What is the problem with this?The    problemthat emerges is thatthere is no general    framework for understanding the concepts and categories under    investigation. Consider physics. Prior to Newton, physics    was a pre-paradigmatic mess, meaning that the concepts and    categories that physicists were using were highly inconsistent.    One of the great achievements of Newtonian science was the    emergence of a shared definitional system that could be    examined empirically. Notice the first part of this sentence. A    shared definitional system. That is a key aspect of cumulative    science. And it is something physics, chemistry and biology    largely have achieved, at least at the core of the discipline. That is,    they know generally what matter, energy, electrons, neutrons,    genes, cells, evolution    and so forth "mean".And is one of the decisive factors    that makes themworthy of the name"science".  
    Psychology completelylacks a shared definitional system.    There is NO agreement on terms like behavior, mind, cognition, self,    consciousness, and the like. And, with its focus on empiricism,    psychology will not achieve such an understanding    because observation and experiment alone are not enough to    define these terms. What is needed is a holistic map that    allows investigators to consider the concepts and categories    that are used for understanding.  
    The concepts and categories that one uses to map reality is    ones metaphysical system. The Periodic Table of the Elements    is a metaphysical system. It offers a map of the elements,    lining them up into different categories. It is a map that is    supported by empirical work, but the map itself is metaphysical    in nature.  
    Psychology needs a metaphysical system for understanding as    much as it needs empirical research.     Without advances in achieving a shared metaphysical system,    psychology will continue to exist as a collection of studies    that offer interesting glimpses into the human condition, but    not deep understanding.  
    The Tree of Knowledge System offers the field of psychology    (and science in general) a metaphysical system from which to    operate. Specifically, it offers a clear: (a) cosmology; (b)    ontological map of key categories in nature; and (c)    epistemological framework for knowledge acquisition.  
    In terms of cosmology,     the ToK System offers a Big History view of the Universe.    Consistent with empirical work on the early universe, the ToK    System posits that we can understand the universe as an    EnergyMatterSpaceTime grid that emerged from a (pure energy)    singularity at the Big Bang, approximately 13.8 billion years    ago.  
    In terms of ontology, in the ToK System, Energy is the ultimate    substance common denominator. The observable universe is    "Energy" in all its different forms (Matter is chunked, frozen    energy).The ToK further posits that universe evolves as    an unfolding wave of Energy-Information, which, consistent with    the Big History formulation, can be placed on the dimensions of    time and complexity.  
    Furthermore, the ToK System posits a general behavioral    metaphysics. That is, the ontological essence of the universe    can be well-described as change in object-field relationships    over time (also characterized as the flow of    Energy-Information).  
    Because the ToK posits the essence of the universe exists as an    unfolding wave of Energy-Information, the ToK gives rise to a    novel view of primary categories in nature. Specifically, it    argues that there are four identifiable dimensions of    complexity, which are depicted and labeled Matter, Life, Mind    and Culture. These dimensions capture the behavior of 1)    objects; 2)organisms; 3)animals and 4)humans.    It proposes that these core categories are differentiated    because each category behaves in a fundamentally novel way.    That is, living objects behave qualitatively differently than    inanimate objects. Animal objects behave qualitatively    differently than other kinds of organisms. And human objects    behave differently than other animals.  
    According to the ToK, these fundamental divisions exist because    of the evolution of different systems of information    processing. The storage and processing of information on the    DNA molecule gives rise to fundamentally different kinds and    levels of self-organization, such that the workings of a cell    are qualitatively different than the behavior of organic    molecules (and are represented as existing on a separate    dimension of self-organization and require a different science,    biology, to describe explain and predict).  
    The emergence of a nervous system in general and brain in    particular gave rise to another information processing system    that resulted in animal behavior    and experiential    consciousness, which are qualitatively different behavior    patterns than are seen at the level of the cell or molecule.    The Mind, Brain, and Behavior sciences (behavioral neuroscience,    computational/cognitive neuroscience, comparative psychology,    ethology, etc) describe this specificdimension of    behavior. The ToK System characterizes these class of sciences    basic psychology, although it should be acknowledged that,    given the fields institutional history, perhaps this cluster    should perhaps just be labeled thesciences ofMind,    Brain, and Behavior.  
    Last, the emergence of language connected human minds together    in novel way, giving rise to human culture and societal group    organizations that are fundamentally different than is seen in    the rest of the animal kingdom.  
    The general behavioral metaphysics of ToK System gives rise to    a Period Table of Behavior, depicted here. A novel feature of    the ToK categorization system of these concepts is that it    positsthat nature must be divided into both levels (part,    whole, group) AND dimensions of complexity (Matter/Objects,    Life/Organisms, Mind/Animals, and Culture/Humans).  
    In terms of epistemology, the ToK System is both empirical    and metaphysical, meaning that it    emphasizes knowledge acquired through the senses and experiment    and emphasizes the need to place such datainto a    coherent conceptual framework. It is the union of empirical    data with coherent conceptual mapping that provides the most    justified knowledge. This can be referred to as a Metaphysical    Empirical epistemological position.  
    The ToK System is consistent with modern physics, chemistry,    and biology. It is particularly useful at the level of    psychology because it provides a new way to define behavior in    general. Behavior is the unfolding wave of Energy-Information.    Thus, Matter and Life behave. Psychologists have been    horribly confused about this point. The ToK makes the common    sense pointthat psychologists are interested in a    particular kind of behavior, specifically mental behaviors,    which are represented by the third dimension of complexity on    the ToK System.Mental behaviorsare the behaviors of    the animal as a whole, mediated by the nervous system.In    such a formulation, the mind refers to the functional    information stored and processed by the nervous system. It is    largely synonymous with the broad definition of cognition. Here    is a map of the information processing architecture of the    human mind.  
    In the ToK System, experiential consciousness is conceptualized    as an embodied whole brain activity that gives rise to    experiential awareness, and is well defined and studied    empirically by frameworks such as     global neuronal workspace theory.  
    Humans exhibit mental behavior like other animals, but there is    an added dimension of complexity. Human language connected    human minds, much like the internet connects individual    computers (and much like the nervous system connected organ    systems in a centralized control center). This results in a    qualitative jump in behavioral complexity. Language, along with    other technological developments like agriculture, historically    set the stage for massive societal/cultural evolutionary    changes. As society became more and more complex, large scale    belief/justification systems emerged, such as religion, law, and    science. Such systems are denoted as Culture with a capital C.  
    Human self-consciousness is a second order form of    consciousness in which the experiential conscious system is    reflected upon and narrated, either to ones self (private    self-consciousness) or to others (public self-consciousness).    The human self-consciousness system functions to build    justification systems for ones actions in society. Thus, there    are three key domains to human consciousness. An experiential    theater of first person awareness, an I-Me second order    private self-consciousness system and an I-Thou public    self-consciousness system. Here is a map of human    consciousness.  
        Psychologistsstronglyaspire fortheir    discipline to be a "real" science. However, to accomplish this    dream, psychologists need to realize that empiricism per se is    not sufficient. If each researcher continues to    operationalize the mind, behavior, cognition, consciousness, or    whatever phenomena of interest they are investigating via their    own (metaphysical) system of understanding, then, despite the    best experiments, all we will have is conceptual mush because    there will be no way to relate the findings systematically. The    ultimate goal of the field is not to just conduct experiments.    It is to build a system of cumulative knowledge about human    mental behavior. This is why we need something akin to a    Periodic Table of the Elements. The ToK offers the field a    Periodic Table of Behavior.  
View post:
A Periodic Table of Behavior for Psychology - Psychology Today (blog)