It’s been two weeks since my post about positioning myself in the weird and contradictory field that is social psychology. In this post i seek to draw out some more solid questions, one’s that could lead me on a path of research, and that i could hopefully begin to answer.
1. What’s the real deal with the critique of different approaches in social psychology? I feel it’s too simple to say that experimental psych is all eronneous and critical-discursive psych is great.
I need a theory of the subject, a theory of natural science, and a theory of cultural constructs.
2. What’s the deal with agency and determination? SP thinks it can describe a deterministic world and on this basis (hypothetically) predict every human action and behaviour. But against this we say that “I chose to do x”.
Start with Wagner. Go on from there?
3. What can writing in the field of SP bring to my interest in violence, how the potential of violence is activated, and how it transpires in patterns, in certian dynamics?
Is violence simply the transgression of a a bounded thing by something external to it?
Is “violence”, or what we name “violence” merely the effect, or legacy, of some more primary dynamic, that has a logic to it? such as exploitation? Or subjection? or subjectivation? slavery? self-destruction? etc.
Is violence “neutral” but worn by “things that are never neutral”?
where to look?