Modern psychology and the fourth way

[Altair]

Hi everyone,

I'm reading "The fourth Way" by Ouspensky now and I'm starting to see some parallels between some important points of the fourth way and modern psychology.
It looks like adaptive unconscious (as described by Timothy D. Wilson in "Strangers to ourselves") and System 1 (as described by Daniel Kahneman in "Thinking, fast and slow") are nothing else but mechanical parts of intellectual (formatory apparatus), emotional, moving and instinctive centers.

Ouspensky writes:

There are two methods of mental conclusions: 'formation' and 'formulation'. 'Formation' is a conclusion arrived at by the way of least resistance, avoiding difficulties. It is easier because it makes itself—ready-made phrases, ready-made opinions, like a stamp. It is generally defective with the exception of the simplest cases. 'Formulation' is a conclusion arrived at on the basis of all the available material; it needs effort and is sometimes difficult, but it means the best we can do.

But certainly it is necessary to learn to distinguish formulation from formation. Formation is, so to speak, just one glance, sometimes quite wrong, and formulation, as I said, is when you collect all you know about a given subject and try to make some deduction from it.

Consequently is our "conscious" processing (as a counterpart of adaptive unconscious in modern psychology terms), also known as System 2, is nothing else but intellectual (and perhaps underdeveloped emotional?) parts of our four centers.

Can anybody see the parallels as well?

 

[Laura]

Have you been reading the articles, comments, threads, in the psychology section of the forum where we comment on this very fact?

 

[Altair]

Have you been reading the articles, comments, threads, in the psychology section of the forum where we comment on this very fact?

Hi Laura,

I'm sorry, I haven't read all the threads about this topic yet. I guess the threads Thinking, Fast And Slow and The Adaptive Unconscious would be the right place to start with, wouldn't it?

Many thanks

Altair

 

[Laura]

Have you been reading the articles, comments, threads, in the psychology section of the forum where we comment on this very fact?

Hi Laura,

I'm sorry, I haven't read all the threads about this topic yet. I guess the threads Thinking, Fast And Slow and The Adaptive Unconscious would be the right place to start with, wouldn't it?

Many thanks

Altair

Also search on "Myth of Sanity" which describes the default state of human beings. As I have remarked several times, it is amazing, inspiring and hopeful to realize that Gurdieff's perspective, combined with what we have learned from the Cs, is supported by modern cognitive science even in terms of how we approach the Work. There are so many conceptual matches that it is astonishing.

 

[Altair]

Have you been reading the articles, comments, threads, in the psychology section of the forum where we comment on this very fact?

Hi Laura,

I'm sorry, I haven't read all the threads about this topic yet. I guess the threads Thinking, Fast And Slow and The Adaptive Unconscious would be the right place to start with, wouldn't it?

Many thanks

Altair

Also search on "Myth of Sanity" which describes the default state of human beings. As I have remarked several times, it is amazing, inspiring and hopeful to realize that Gurdieff's perspective, combined with what we have learned from the Cs, is supported by modern cognitive science even in terms of how we approach the Work. There are so many conceptual matches that it is astonishing.

Thanks, Laura :)

I will check the thread and will probably reread the corresponding book to find more clues.

 

[davey72]

I think the splitting thread would also be a good one for you to look at.