Podcast: Play in new window | Download (Duration: 1:01:01 — 55.9MB)
Continuing on Psychology, the Briefer Course (1892), completing "The Stream of Thought" and covering the chapter on "Habit."
James thinks that psychologists focus too much on those parts of consciousness that get picked out by substantive words; we neglect those "fringe" parts that are harder to pick out specifically. Do elementary particles have "habits"? James describes habit as part of a general natural pattern in which things that happen once tend to create pathways for themselves in surrounding material to allow the same thing to happen again more easily. Be careful what you do, because your organism is recording all of your bad behavior and corrupting your character!
Start with part one or get the ad-free, unbroken Citizen Edition. Please support PEL!
End song: "Drowning Mind (feedback overload)" by AMP, from their newly released album, Q Factors (a mixtape). Richard Amp was interviewed about this album for Nakedly Examined Music #57.
Our treatment of this book continues with ep. 180.
It's not too late to get a 2018 PEL Wall Calendar!
Sponsors: Get up to $50 off a DNA kit at 23andme.com/pel. Visit MUBI.com/PEL for 30 days of free curated movies.
the latest version of this sort of Jamesian psychology/philo is in the work of folks like Andy Clark and Lisa Feldman Barrett, see for example: http://meaningoflife.tv/videos/38997
Is the brain plasticity idea overstated?
* I’m watching middle-aged people transform RIGHT NOW after their being relocated overseas.
* I’ve seen people dramatically changed by retirement.
* I saw dramatic changes in my own habits when I became a parent.
* In fact, I’ve gained and lost dozens of habits without even trying.
Are food addiction and external structure a better explanation than habit?
brain plasticity in general is overstated these days but none of the changes you note would be possible if our neurology was fixed, habit is a broad idea in James (more like Whitehead than Dewey) and could likely be read to include both of your examples, we often make the mistake of thinking about these folks (including Nietzsche) in terms of individual-psychology/self-improvement but I think we need to understand them more in ecological (even perhaps cosmological) terms.
“Sam Harris speaks with Daniel Goleman and Richard J. Davidson about the current scientific understanding of meditation practice. They speak about the original stigma associated with meditation, the history of introspection in eastern and western cultures, the recent collaboration between Buddhism and western science, the difference between altered states and altered traits, an alternate conception of mental health, “meta-awareness,” the relationship between mindfulness and “flow,” the difference between pain and suffering, mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR), and other topics.”
https://www.samharris.org/podcast/item/111-the-science-of-meditation
Seth, there is an audible version – you must have missed it somehow
https://www.audible.com/pd/Science-Technology/The-Principles-of-Psychology-Vol-I-Audiobook/B07934H9SC?ref=a_a_search_c3_lProduct_1_2&pf_rd_p=e81b7c27-6880-467a-b5a7-13cef5d729fe&pf_rd_r=FZ9S47942X0SFW10AY1R&
Thanks Scott!