ext_104785 ([identity profile] kangetsuhime.livejournal.com) wrote in [community profile] multiplicity_archives 2006-11-25 01:40 am (UTC)

Using this theory, I think you'd be (probably accidentally) implying that anybody who is not a 100% seperate full-on multiple (or complete singlet) is suffering from a... big fuck up? >.>

The analogy feels *really* off to me, and it's annoying me that I can't pinpoint why. The initial thing that jumps out is how the formation of carbon based bodies is very different to the maturing of a human conciousness, so to me comparing them is like apples and oranges.

It just... doesn't sit right. And it's going to annoy me until I can properly verbalise why. I firmly feel that saying "biology works X way therefore psychology could too" is... not really logical. They're very seperate sciences.

(I have nothing against the belief about souls walking-in or being born in a body, but in talking about 'the formation of minds', you're talking psychology from where I'm standing)

Post a comment in response:

This account has disabled anonymous posting.
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting