Ken Wilbur also has a book called Elegance and Courage (translated by Hu Yinmeng and Liu Qingyan).
Scientific psychology was born in 1879 in Germany, and the psychology developed so far belongs to the category of science, which is basically divided into seven categories:
1。 Psychodynamic perspective;
2。 Behaviorism perspective;
3。 Humanistic perspective;
4。 Cognitive perspective;
5。 Biological perspective;
6。 Evolutionary perspective;
7。 Social and cultural perspective.
Post-humanistic psychology is called "the fourth wave" after humanistic psychology. It's really an amazing book: great spirit, great universe, emptiness, creativity, wholeness, drive and so on. The author thinks that reality is composed of conjunctions, and "conjunctions are everything". Look at the following paragraph: "great spirit and emptiness are absolute, but they are not dull, lifeless and inflexible, because they can show themselves: new forms appear and creativity is the ultimate." Empty', creative, whole ". The author seems to deny the theory of evolution and probability, and thinks that the universe composed of all children is intelligent, creative and hierarchical. An example used by the author to deny the theory of evolution is the story of 1000 monkeys and Shakespeare: "If given enough time, those monkeys who type at random will eventually produce a Shakespeare play." This time is 65.438+0 billion years, while the universe is only 65.438+0.2 billion years. The author especially likes oriental mysticism, citing many concepts of Buddhism and Taoism, and the author has personally experienced religion. Can the western scientific community tolerate such a thing? I think if I were in China, I would be labeled as "pseudoscience".
I don't know much about psychology. Does Ken Wilbur belong to the same scientific group? Can Ken Wilbur's viewpoint roughly represent post-humanistic psychology? If so, is post-humanistic psychology scientifically recognized? I hope someone can give me some advice, thank you!