Nothing Hidden in the Entire Universe

Author(s):  
Steven Heine

In considering the roots, basis, and aftermath of the Verse Comments, which was composed as a lyrical interpretation of the 60-fascicle edition of Dōgen’s Treasury of the True Dharma Eye, several facts are well known about when and why it was written. However, many aspects of the historical context remain unclear in regard to the reasons for the textual production, so that there is no choice but to make some conjectures based on compelling literary and chronological evidence. Speculation about the formation and dissemination (or lack thereof) of Giun’s work in relation to the significance of the 60-fascicle edition should be argued by assessing traditional records along with contemporary research that has uncovered important archival materials for Treasury manuscripts previously unavailable to scholars. This chapter explains the evidence while summarizing recent theories about the possible rationale for how and why the Verse Comments was constructed.

2012 ◽  
pp. 1-18
Author(s):  
Ann H. Kim ◽  
Marianne S. Noh ◽  
Samuel Noh

2002 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 194-198 ◽  
Author(s):  
Felicia Pratto

I concur with Jost and Kruglanski (this issue) that the rift between social constructivist and experimental social psychology is bigger than it need be. I do so by showing that many social-psychological theories predict why we have the rift that we do. I use this method to point out that self-reflexivity is possible and desirable. This is especially the case when we try to consider how our own political and historical context influences our work. I give examples from my teaching of social psychology, and of contemporary research that has been informed by both social constructivist criticisms and by knowledge of experimental methods.


2011 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 111-117 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ype H. Poortinga ◽  
Ingrid Lunt

The European Association of Psychologists’ Associations (EFPA) was created in 1981 as the European Association of Professional Psychologists’ Associations (EFPPA). We show that Shakespeare’s dictum “What’s in a name?” does not apply here and that the loss of the “first P” (the adjectival “professional”) was resisted for almost two decades and experienced by many as a serious loss. We recount some of the deliberations preceding the change and place these in a broader historical context by drawing parallels with similar developments elsewhere. Much of the argument will refer to an underlying controversy between psychology as a science and the practice of psychology, a controversy that is stronger than in most other sciences, but nevertheless needs to be resolved.


1997 ◽  
Vol 42 (11) ◽  
pp. 990-991
Author(s):  
Isaac Prilleltensky

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document