Comments on: Stage Fright

By: Augustus F. Kinzel,M.D.

Augustus F. Kinzel,M.D. — Sun, 08 Mar 2009 21:33:23 +0000

I am a psychiatrist and psychoanalyst. I noticed that with
psychodynamically accurate psychotherapy patients had spontaneous growth into subsequent phases, at times in areas never touched on in the therapy. It was like lifting a rock off the sapling.

It is more likely that mature and advanced developmental phases do exist but that unconscious anxiety is holding back development in many so they never get there. The naysayers on development may have not seen it in themselves or their patients and then use this as an absence of evidence for development. That’s like saying elephants don’t exist because you have never seen one.

Also, the notion that biologically hard wired developmental phases would disappear because of contemporary social and economic conditions is unlikely. That’s like saying menstruation disappears in some women because women in these times are too busy for it.

The more likely current condition is that many have inhibited development, not that development has disappeared or was just bad theory. It is not good science to dismiss all the available evidence for consecutive developmental phases and stages because one doesn’t see it.

By: Pat McKnight, Nurse Educator

Pat McKnight, Nurse Educator — Tue, 30 Dec 2008 21:50:08 +0000

Thank you, Dr. Shermer. One of the examples given above, Kohlberg’s theory of “moral” development, has been effectively challenged by Carol Gilligan. She demonstrates that Kohlberg’s model does not apply to all, even to all in Western society. She hypothesizes that women value the welfare of the community over abstract justice, and postulates this is a higher level than abstract justice. Neither Kohlberg nor Gilligan acknowledge that different cultures develop differently and may have different values. For sceptics neither offer an adequate model for a theory of “moral” development which would apply to all cultures.

By: Theo Dawson, Ph.D.

Theo Dawson, Ph.D. — Tue, 30 Dec 2008 15:59:16 +0000

Michael Schermer’s concerns about many stage theories are well founded, but he makes a serious mistake when he lumps all “stage” theories into the same category. Cognitive developmental stage theories, like those of Piaget, Kohlberg, and Fischer are very different from the “armchair” theories that have informed clinical psychology. They are backed by thousands of refereed research articles. Cognitive developmental researchers disagree on the details, but there is a strong convergence with respect to the general structure and trajectory of cognitive development. New academic disciplines–like Mind. Brain, and Education–incorporate a cognitive developmental perspective, and theoretical perspectives–like Kurt Fischer’s skill theory–increasingly inform clinical practice, teaching practice, curriculum development, and student assessment.

By: Donna Trussell

Donna Trussell — Sat, 06 Dec 2008 06:15:38 +0000

I applaud your challenge to these popular notions. I am a cancer survivor who is still waiting for my anxiety and fear to subside and turn into a beautiful butterfly. It’s been seven years, but I’m still not one bit grateful I got cancer.

By: Moet rouw in fasen verlopen?

Moet rouw in fasen verlopen? — Sat, 22 Nov 2008 14:02:47 +0000

[...] over dit onderwerp, hier: Stage Fright /* ‘); /* ]]> */ /* [...]

By: Harold Mantle

Harold Mantle — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 01:49:03 +0000

One does not necessarily feel safe assuming all people are angels; nor should one necessarily worry assuming some people are not. The I-95 bridge failure was the results of incorrectly sized gussets (original design error not caught by checker) combined with local overloading of bridge surface with construction materials intended for bridge maintenance. A domino-effect ensued. Neither error suggests venality on the part of the humans involved.

BTW, my guess for most read dead ecomonist would have been Adam Smith.

By: Ric

Ric — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 17:26:11 +0000

Bravo!!! Dr. Shermer,

Twenty years ago, I almost failed a grad class in Human Relations, because in my term paper I quoted Piaget (I actually went out and read his work) who used a fancy French word (which I have by now forgotten) as a caveat stating that development was not necessarily linear but often circular. The Prof. want to fail me for this blasphemy. The same thing happened in a Life Span development class, when I was assigned a paper on IQ tests and use Mr. Gould’s Mismeasure of Man as a reference.

Which brings me to my second point. In your book on Capitalism, you made several examples, such as, “I feel comfortable driving on this road and bridge because…” etc. Then the bridge in Minnesota collapses and Route I-95 almost collapses, etc. For one, in my years in forensics it is assumed that most people are not angels, which is why Marx is still the most read economic thinker to this day. For two, I believe stuff like my Prof insulting my work is in the way people disagree; when we are too confident in our knowledge we tend to be very disagreeable to other side.
Anyhow thank you for bringing attention to this important fact on development and finally- would you feel safe driving over a bridge in Newark, New Jersey? LOL!