Recent psychology has moved away from the once popular Freud: According to How to Think Straight About Psychology (Stanovich), less than ten percent of the specializations of the American Psychological Society are currently devoted to Freud and Freudian analysis. What’s more, the recent confirmation of parallels to consciousness in neurological studies of the brain is causing a pushback against once popular behaviorist views of the mind. In fact, the leading behaviorist BF Skinner died in 1990.
Perhaps it is the end of an era for materialists in psychology (if it seems that Freud was too materialistic in allying himself with determinism, as he used to do). But some aspects of psychology are only feeling the change now. At first, consciousness had a reputation for spiritualism or, conversely, it was clouded by hard science and the mindsets of formalized institutions. Now psychology seems more avant-garde, as researchers from leading universities have confirmed evidence for the genetic origins of disease and the dynamic tandem conditioning of the human brain, both genetically and developmentally.
Neurology is also destined to get a big boost (at some point) from the public spread of neuroscanning techniques. These offer the potential to publicly interact with aspects of the brain, including the exchange and development of shared brain information. Gradually, it may be that this ‘mental data’ is adopted as an exponent of the even newer theme of stimulating the brain, with implications for visual culture and mass market businesses. Some people are still unaware that electrodes (or more commonly, electrode caps that are worn on the head) are often non-invasive. Electrode caps even explain the popularity of women’s short hair. This is an unconscious adaptation to the early and accurate assumption that the electrodes will socially integrate neurological functions and make our thoughts highly interactive.
The heyday of this trend in psychology, both for what could be called interface materialism, and for the integration of thoughts, often called immaterial things, is a trend toward the intangible. But it is also a trend towards a new psychology. I will avoid the belief that relying on fossilized examples of thoughts from the past constitutes a kind of historicism. Instead, reliance on fossilized examples is a new hyper-dimensional carving of reality, which seeks to re-visualize, reopen, all the preconditions of current belief, and especially, in the context of technology, reevaluate the highly applications that are functions of the same metadata fossils.
We should not assume that the trend toward interface psychology, which follows interface materialism, is negligible. In the way that behaviorists doubted the spirit and psychology in general doubted the core of human nature, interface culture has a preferential pretext for assuming that context is everything. And, like these pre-existing tendencies (Freud, behaviorism), that assumption has some utility. While the new youth are busy imagining (as the new generation often does) that the new trends are an embodiment of a diabolical nihilism that justifies self-love or radical feminism, the older youth (such as those in their 30s and 40s) ) have a more passive angle of the consumer, who as Esther Dyson has said in her article on “Attention Society”, makes social media-oriented decisions that affect consumerism in unpredictable ways. The result of this trend in consumerism, and what appears to be the beginning of a society that is functionally advanced by the interface, is that psychology is more often a function of the interface than a function of our own minds. But interestingly, this seems to be just the first step, towards realization, just as functionalism is turning into applicationism, how interface culture is just a prerequisite for highly thought-oriented interfaces. Although these interfaces are still interfaces (and that must be taken into account), they are also brain access devices that can implement the most radically functional concepts of metadata, even before mental information comes to represent metaphysical differences in Purum.
Clearly, psychology at this point exists in three senses, none of which relate to Freud or behaviorism: [1] Mental information, [2] Effective technologies and [3] Implementation of thought. In this sense, there is a new provision, depending on the dependence on computer interfaces, to express functionality explicitly by word terms such as “enhancement”, “technicality” and “artificial”. Moreover, these words no longer connote some aspect that is amalgamated ad hoc, such as an external sense of personality, doctoral authority or functional identity. In fact, most of the time it is seen as a skill or talent at any time, some aspect of identity is NOT dependent on technology. This is a trend that started with the telephone. People expected additional rewards by granting the privilege of speaking with someone in person. The same goes for conversations on the Internet. People make a joke about being extraordinary gods (without magic, of course) whenever something happens without an interface. In this new system there are essentially two powers: [1] Nature and [2] Technology. But most of the time technology takes up most of the pie. People begin to interpret nature as a form of magic. It doesn’t always work on electricity. Or, again, maybe it’s just another kind.
There is a parallel with psychology. Much of the brain now takes care of artificial functions. This is a trend that began with aesthetics and continued in Tarski’s Insolubility Theorem, the theory that mathematics cannot prove something without referring to something else. The natural continuation of these bodies of associations is the context-obsessed interface culture. People have moved away from solving big problems — or at least, away from the perspective that big problems are big, as atheism overshadowed it — and have begun to focus on problem solving. in a very local setting. scale. Although the opposite is true with business, not everyone believes in business psychology.
Where psychology occurs, most of the time the only condition in which people will recognize a larger picture is by reference to some form of interface technology. That means that psychology itself has indeed been overshadowed in [1] Definite concepts, albeit surrogates (winners often resemble government, schizophrenia, beauty, and relativity) and [2] The extensive body of deliberation about the meaning of information technology, which often depends on minimizing a dogma borrowed from the surrogate: people will take sides, using such complex arguments as ‘Mathematics: Relativity’ or ‘Philosophy: Schizophrenia’ or ‘Economy: Government’. Where is the psychology? It’s tied to every concept that is being used, to every “previous assumption” that contributes to the evidence, and conclusively, finally, now it’s half the time related to information technology – all those science fiction movies without end up. Indeed, we are indebted to the media.
If we don’t think that the media is still thinking for themselves, we could gain an advantage by psychologizing the nature of interface design and consciousness, to realize that human thinking is more of an artifice than before. It is becoming a commodity, but it provides an opportunity to develop media standards that directly relate to the future experiences of those who will have largely media-defined perceptions. The system for organizing, maintaining and monitoring the database of artificially produced media interacting with the mind has not yet been generated. Psychology must play a role that recognizes the substantiation of the interface as a form of psychology. Otherwise, there will be no sacred standard forcing future media, such as experience, to be psychological.
Furthermore, if these prescriptions for organized media indicate that souls have been sold in design decisions, in some respects that may ultimately have less significance than the significance of psychology itself. Psychology, knowingly or not, has long wagered on the existence of the human soul. Now it must present a shallow exterior to defend what is left of it. The secret choice, however, simply involves the quality of the media.