psychociology

The Cults as cancers post is important because it is the beginning of setting a possible structure for the development of a psychociology or a combination of psychoanalysis and sociology which I've been talking about for a long time if not in this blog in the fofblog in the past three years.

More than a psychociology or anything that separates the human being into particles, we need a human being able to look at the whole and understand the parts and every science as we've separated them today is only an aspect of the whole.

I realize how young and naive I might be to pretend to set an outline of such a science but more than inventing anything I think I am remembering everything and what I think is necessary is not a new science but an understanding of the different spheres of being human without separating them. I can barely understand Judith Butler's language but it's my guess that she's already pointing at something like that. I'm not creating anything although there's creativity in the act of remembering and reassembling our selves into a new version of our own understanding. Most of what I'm saying, I believe, has already been said better, understood more deeply and presented more beautifully and "professionally" but a lot of what I am saying I am not seeing dealt with in the way I am trying to deal with it and that is why my effort seems worthwhile. If it doesn't serve to clear anyone else, it'll at least make me clear about my own understanding.

I'm simply expanding on what Systems of knowledge already understand being only a beginner in such realm: that there is an inner human and a social human and that the dialogue between them establishes the "life" of the day.

Every science as much as every individual effort should lead towards a more human Earth, with more human nations, with more human societies, with more human communities and with more human individuals within those communities. If whatever we are doing is not aiming to achieve that, we are no more than criminals.
*