Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id OAA13819 (8.6.9/5.3[ref firstname.lastname@example.org] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from email@example.com); Mon, 4 Feb 2002 14:58:56 GMT X-Originating-IP: [188.8.131.52] From: "Grant Callaghan" <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: email@example.com Subject: Re: Abstractism Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2002 06:53:14 -0800 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: <LAW2-F140aXHMzGCMcR00004318@hotmail.com> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 04 Feb 2002 14:53:15.0164 (UTC) FILETIME=[ACA505C0:01C1AD8B] Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: email@example.com
>On 02/03/02 23:37, Grant Callaghan said this-
> >doctor was not trying to put a thought into their minds with the ink
> >but to pull one out.
>I think there are enough criticisms about the Rorschach and other tests
>of its type that purport that there is indeed a 'doctor trying to put a
>thought into their minds', and that the setting and the context are prime
>movers of this criticism.
>Intent and meaning are often obscured within each other. The montage
>school of cinema is based upon the elicitation of certain emotions and
>reactions from (possibly) unrelated, and by themselves meaningless,
>But, yes, the most valid criticism of such tests is that, indeed, nothing
>but the bias and pretensions of the doctor are being exposed.
What you see is what you get. ;-)>
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Feb 04 2002 - 15:07:42 GMT