ORDINARY USES FOR DESCRIPTIVE PSYCHOLOGY

F. Richard Singer III Edition date: May 2008

Preliminary Remark: This abstract below is a plan for a paper to be completed after the 2008 SDP conference. The current edition of that paper is only the skeleton that will be used as a tentative position paper to consider in a discussion in our session at the conference.

Abstract: Unlike the conceptual networks widely used by most professional psychologists, the concepts in Descriptive Psychology are refined and systematic version of those routinely used by most people. It might seem that this should make DP easy to understand. Why then has DP not become a part of our routine public discourse for thinking about what persons do?

¨ Is it because having DP versions of such concepts seldom provides a notable advantage in ordinary situations over those routinely used?

¨ Is it because most courses of action seldom involve people in the kinds of practices that help them in acquiring DP concepts?

¨ Is it because there are subtle features that make DP especially difficult for most people?

If any of these reasons are relevant, what can we do to help people incorporate DP into the net they routinely use? Since learning DP is a form of behavior, DP should help us think about how people acquire and appreciate its concepts. As a prelude, we consider an imaginary conversation in which a person’s behavior is discussed in an ordinary manner. We will then relate this to a DP behavior description and some comments related to the above questions. We continue our exploration of these questions with some further imaginary conversations about ordinary matters, comparing these to the perspective that might be gained by using Descriptive Psychology.

Jan: Didn’t you go to the store because you wanted to renew your supply of canned salmon and obtain some cornmeal for making salmon patties tomorrow? I see that you got cornmeal, but not salmon.

Mack: Yes. I first got a large bag of cornmeal, on sale for $2.49. Just after putting six cans of salmon in my shopping cart, I spotted canned mackerel at 80¢ a can. Salmon was $1.69 a can. I replaced the salmon with a dozen cans of mackerel and then checked out for less than $14.

Jan: Why did you buy so many cans of mackerel and no salmon?

Mack: The store had not had mackerel for a long time, so I decided to stock up. I like having stocks of food that I use on a regular basis.

Jan: You must really like mackerel. I thought you preferred salmon.

Mack: I do like mackerel loaf, altho you are right that I often prefer salmon patties.

Jan: Then why did you put the salmon back? Why not buy some of each?

Mack: The cost of a can of mackerel is less than half the cost of a can of salmon. I got twice as much and saved 54¢. I had decided to spend less than $14 and estimated what this would cover. As my stock of cornmeal was low, I couldn’t stock up on mackerel and also buy salmon. Since I have some salmon cans, I now have a choice about whether to make salmon patties or mackerel loaf tomorrow.

Jan: I suppose you also needed cornmeal for a mackerel loaf.

Mack: Yes, I had already planned to purchase these for the salmon, but they are also needed for a mackerel loaf. I also wanted to use some of the chopped green peppers from last summer’s garden in my freezer. I use these in a mackerel loaf but not in salmon patties.

Ordinary Behavioral Accounts: Mack began with a simple ordinary account of what he did. He mainly indicated his performance with a brief acknowledgement of Jan’s perception of his initial wants. He also gave some hints about his attitude and reasons, altho he didn’t explicitly focus on them. It is apparent his actions were directed towards a want that he did not express. As we can see from their interchange, he didn’t indicate much of what is involved in what he did. For one thing, Jan’s first remarks explicitly focus on what he achieved in relation to what he said he wanted. Observing this interchange, an observer could give a more informative account of Mack’s behavior.

Unless our purposes involve more than giving a brief account of behavior, most of our ordinary ones are sketchy. An observer’s account might only add one or two salient points to reduce any puzzlement about what Mack did. On the other hand, an account could be fairly extensive. It depends on the observer’s purposes. An observer might want to include most of what was revealed in the interchange between Mack and Jan. This could be used to place Mack’s behavior in a broader context than we normally consider in an account of what someone did. Such an account could not only help us understand what Mack did in this episode, but also to gain a perspective on what he is like and what he might do in other situations.

Of course, we normally obtain our perspectives on a person by a number of brief reflections on what they do. Moreover many of these reflections are so casual that we are not explicitly aware of them. However there might be times when giving an extensive account of behavior could be useful. For instance it may help us focus on something we might miss in a more casual way of thinking about what a person does. This might be useful when the person’s behavior does not fit our expectations. Perhaps it is not what we would have done or not what most people would have done in that situation. Perhaps it is what some people would do, but not what we would have anticipated from this person. Altho the one below may include more than would usually be expected, it merely includes details that came out in the interchange between Mack and Jan. Before reading the account below, you might want to formulate an account that you think is more informative than the one initially given by Mack.

Mack initially wanted canned salmon and cornmeal. He wanted these in to order make salmon patties and to restock his supply of salmon. After getting the cornmeal, he put six cans of salmon in his shopping cart. Upon seeing the mackerel, he decided that he preferred having a supply of mackerel. This would allow him to use the cornmeal to make a mackerel loaf instead of the salmon patties. Figuring out what he could buy with $14, he put twelve cans of mackerel in his shopping cart and returned the salmon. Altho he preferred salmon to mackerel, he knew that the mackerel was more economical. He also recalled the chopped green peppers in his freezer that he could use in a mackerel loaf. His decision to buy mackerel instead is consistence with his trait of being frugal. He also knew that the store did not always have mackerel in stock and that obtaining salmon would not be a problem. He did not return the cornmeal, since it is something he stocks and is also needed to make a mackerel loaf. Altho he did not obtain salmon as planned, he obtained an even greater amount of mackerel, which might have been harder to obtain at a later date. In addition he obtained what he need for his meal on the next day.

An observer who knows Mack well might add even more. His sister has often heard him say that a penny saved is a penny earned. She might add that not only was Mack getting twice as much, he was saving 54¢. His sister might also note the connection between ‘Mack’ and ‘mackerel’ and that buying mackerel was significant to Mack because he associated this connection with good luck. Altho adding more to an account may add more perspective, it may also distort the perspective by focusing on insignificant details or even by mistaking what is going on. Giving a faithful and pertinent account depends not only on its purposes, but also on the competence of the observer.

A Systematic Behavior Description: In order to stress the extent to which Descriptive Psychology is a version of the net routinely used by most people, we note that this preceding account includes the same considerations as one that might be given using DP concepts. What DP mainly adds is a systematic organization like the one sketched below, which indicates the types of considerations involved. Using something like this to augment or precede an account of behavior can help remind an observer of features that might otherwise be overlooked, much as having a shopping list can remind a shopper to purchase something they might have otherwise overlooked. Letters labeling these and bold face fonts are there to focus on the types of considerations often used in describing or accounting for behavior. These and other related DP concepts are versions of what the ordinary connotations of these terms suggest. The DP versions of these and some other concepts, along with the related terminology, are briefly explained in the appendix. DP uses the term ‘behavior description’ for its version of what people might ordinarily refer to as an account of behavior.

(I) Mack is identified as the one engaged in the behavior.

(W) He explicitly wanted salmon and cornmeal. He also implicitly wanted mackerel, and this became clear when he saw that it was available.

(K) He knows that the store always has salmon but seldom has mackerel. He knows that cornmeal is needed both for making salmon patties and for making a mackerel loaf. He also knows that he uses green pepper in a mackerel loaf and that he has some left in his freezer. He knows the prices of individual items.

(KH) He knows how to estimate the cost of various purchases, keeping it under $14. He knows how to make both salmon patties and mackerel loafs.

(P) His performance includes putting cornmeal and six cans of salmon in his shopping cart, replacing the salmon with a dozen cans of mackerel, and checking out.

(A) His main achievement was to obtain cornmeal and twelve cans of mackerel.

(C) Mack’s trait of frugality is a characteristic involved in this behavioral episode. Another relevant characteristic is his attitudes toward mackerel and salmon and his attitude towards stocking food. Altho he preferred salmon to mackerel, being frugal carried more weight.

(S) This was significant to him because it provided what he needed to make a mackerel loaf and also have a stock of canned mackerel. Altho he did not obtain salmon as planned, he was obtaining an even greater amount of mackerel, which might have been harder to obtain later. In addition he was providing the ingredients he needed for his meal on the next day. Had he chosen salmon instead, this would have been significant to him because he could have made salmon patties and restocked his supply of salmon.

There are a number of characteristics we use in thinking about behavior, such as traits and attitudes being indicated above. A more extensive list includes those given in the appendix.

Understanding People: We acquire our ordinary net for understanding people and what they do thru engaging in the practices of the communities to which we actively belong. Moreover we are somewhat successful in obtaining our understanding by a number of brief reflections on what people do. Our focus is usually more on what is being done than on accounting for it, and even when we talk about doing, our accounts are often superficial. We are more often engaged as actors than as observers, but even as observers we are usually expected to give a brief narrative or simple explanation rather than to consider what was done in relation to a broader perspective. This may be one reason why a net like Descriptive Psychology has not become a part of our public net for thinking about what persons do. Also there are features that might make DP difficult for some people to acquire. Before elaborating on these points, let us consider perspectives that DP provides for thinking about the acquisition of concepts.

Concept Parameters: Altho Descriptive Psychology makes considerable use of parameters, it has not explicitly formulated parameters for thinking about the role a concept has in a person’s world. The paper Concept Parameters proposes that this role can be conceptualized as a complex personal state of affairs, using five concept parameters. The parameters below indicate a relationship between a person P and a concept or a set of concepts C.

¨ proximity: indicates the extent that C is close to or remote from P’s ordinary experience

¨ integration: indicates how C is connected to other concepts within the nets used by P

¨ explanation: refers to ways that P would or would be able to explain C

¨ focus: refers to the ways P understands the precision of C

¨ utility: indicates anything that is noteworthy about the uses or types of uses that P has for C

These parameters can also be used as attributes for thinking about a public concept or network of concepts as used in some community.

Behavioral Account Concepts: As a prelude to thinking about how to help someone acquire DP concepts, let us use these parameters to consider both the ordinary concept BA of a behavioral account and the DP concept BD of a behavior description.

Proximity: BA (the concept of a behavioral account) is highly manifest, being close to the ordinary experience of most people. Almost everybody routinely gives some brief accounts (such as the one given by Mack) of something they have done or might do. Likewise they routinely give such accounts of the behavior of others. BD (the concept of a behavioral description) is more remote, at least for most people, perhaps because it is more comprehensive and systematic than the ordinary concept. I suspect that people are seldom called upon to place their behavior or the behavior of others in a broad perspective and to do so in a systematic manner. Nevertheless, BD may be potentially manifest to most people, i.e. being remote may be due to a lack of relevant experience that could be fairly easily acquired rather than to a lack of capacity.

Integration: Almost any concept routinely used might be mentioned in either an ordinary or a DP account of behavior. Both BA and BD are also directly connected to those used systematically in formulating a DP behavior description, altho BA is more strongly connected to performance and sometimes to wants and achievement. In addition there are many additional concepts that are connected to both BA and BD in a noteworthy manner, altho because DP has more conceptual distinctions than the net most people routinely use, BD is more elaborately connected in DP than BA is connected in our routine net. Moreover BA is more loosely integrated than BD.

Explanation: Normally, BA is taken for granted, i.e. people are likely to be puzzled if anyone asked them to explain it. If asked, the response might merely indicate that BA tells what was done and gives some relevant reasons. On the other hand, an explanation of BD is called for. Giving an explanation could involve some examples, like the one given for Mack, followed by the parameters used to formulate these examples and the general explanation of them that is given in the appendix. Moreover, a variety of Maxims could be used to enhance the explanation.

Focus: Perhaps nobody keeps BA in sharp focus, nor would it normally be useful to do so. This does not mean that the concept is vague, altho it usually is and should be. What it means is that people are seldom aware of when its use is vague or when its usage is fairly precise. However BA is often kept in focus by the context. BD is much more precise and less dependent on context. To use BD effectively this must be at least implicitly in focus. Moreover this concept is not reducible to more basic concepts. Its precision is due to the way it is rigorously integrated in a network of related concepts. Keeping BD in focus requires that a number of other concepts also be kept in focus.

Utility: BA has extremely broad utility in relation to almost any realm of interest, since at any time it might serve some purpose to think about giving an account of what we are doing or what someone else is doing. However since at most of these times it seems more useful to actually take the actor role and carry on with what we are doing, it is not as essential to most people as many of their other concepts. At any time that it might be useful to use an ordinary behavioral account, a more systematic account could have potential utility, altho in many cases employing it may not have any noteworthy payoff. As noted earlier using BD might be most helpful when the person’s behavior does not fit our expectations. However, the broad utility of BD is not due to its detailed employment as much as to having the ability to employ it. Person’s who have mastered this concept are likely to implicitly see features in there own actions and in the actions of others that they might otherwise miss. This is a subtle utility that is hard to appreciate prior to the acquisition and use of BD.

Problems with DP Concepts: The parametric analysis of many ordinary concepts as compared with their DP versions would reveal features like those in comparing BA and BD. Many of the problems that people are likely to have in acquiring DP concepts are implicit in this analysis. For each parameter BA is (not surprisingly) ordinary in ways that BD is not. For a concept to play a noteworthy role in a person’s world it must seem manifest and appropriately connected. Moreover the connections must not seem to be too elaborate. Explaining it must either seem doable when necessary but seldom appropriate. Even if the concept is out of focus, it must not feel that way, as can happen if it has elaborate connections. Most important, the concept must have some significant utility for that person. This is indicated in Ossorio’s comment on Maxim D4, where he essentially says the following about how we normally acquire concepts.

A person acquires concepts by engaging in one or more of the social practices that call for and offer an opportunity to use of that concept.

For those of us who have acquired DP concepts, we had sufficient reasons to engage in such practices, altho our practices and our reasons may have differed significantly. For most people, our reasons would not be their reasons, and they would be unlikely to have sufficient reasons to engage in any of these practices. For a concept to have utility, it must relate to doing things that a person has reasons to do.

The General Utility of DP Concepts: The statement below is a modification of what Tony Putman said in the introduction to Place. I think it expresses the essence of the potential wider utility we can all recognize in having the DP behavioral description concept. This could be said about almost any concept used in Descriptive Psychology.

Formulating a behavior description concept encapsulates our understanding of what it means to describe (or account for) behavior, which we already knew but might not know we knew - and “knowing that we know” makes a significant difference, both in understanding and in giving descriptions.

What is this significant difference? As I remarked earlier, almost anyone who has mastered this concept is likely to implicitly see features in their own actions and in the actions of others that they might otherwise miss. Why is this not widely recognized? My tentative partial answer was that altho I think this might be applicable to most people, this is a subtle utility that is hard to appreciate prior to the acquisition and use of BD. Nor is utility unrelated to the other concept parameters. As long as a concept feels remote and does not seem to lend itself to a simple explanation, it is unlikely to seem useful to many people, and even if it seems that it might have utility, the payoff might not seem worth the difficulty involved in acquiring it. Also as remarked earlier, the more elaborate conceptual connections and ensuing focus problems involving BD may obscure the extent of its utility. However most people have times in which they are puzzled either by their own actions or by the actions of others. Perhaps this could be a key to a wider recognition of the potential utility of having DP concepts.

Acquiring DP Concepts: Imagine that we had some group (or some individual) who was interested in working with us to enhance their ordinary ways of understanding people and what people do. How could we go about involving them in the kinds of practices that help them acquire and appreciate the utility of DP concepts? Depending on the characteristics of those in the group, there are various concepts that could be used to provide a starting point. Suppose we started with the behavior description concept. Below are various types of relevant practices. These are ordered in relation to the utility perspective of most people, i.e. that last one is the one that most people might find the least useful most of the time. However for those who want to better understand people and what they do, being engaged some time in each of these practices might be helpful. Similar practices would apply to any other DP concept or cluster of concepts.

¨ Describe Actual Cases: Formulate ordinary behavior descriptions that you have actually observed

¨ Describe Imaginary Cases: Formulate some imaginary ordinary behavior descriptions

¨ Examine Case Histories: Read and discuss various ordinary cases of behavior descriptions

¨ Examine Concepts: Read and discuss materials about BD and its relation to other DP concepts

As a resource for these practices, we might we have a team creates cases and examples and posts them on the SDP website with some commentary.

Describe Actual Cases: For a person who already considers giving account of behavior useful, this might be the best initial practice. They already understand BA and could give a superficial account of some things they did or observed someone else doing that they found of interest. They could then expand on these to give more informative accounts, by either further reflections or discussions with others. This could be followed by a use of BD to see if using parameters might provide further insight. The utility (or lack of utility) of BD for these cases could be considered. Such a practice should also include cases of something the person might plan to actually do, taking the critic as well as the observer role, with the goal of making the action more effective.

Describe Imaginary Cases: For person’s who easily relate to fiction, this might be the best initial practice. An imaginary conversation, like the one involving Mack and Jan, could be followed by what was the same type of activities recommended for actual cases. Altho an advantage of actual cases can be a direct link to what many think of as practical utility, making something up is an intrinsic practice that many people find useful for its own sake. Fiction can be more fun than fact. The Mack example is based on an actual case that was modified to make it more interesting to its author. An advantage of imaginary cases is that they can be customized to bring out feature that you want to emphasize. Such features are more likely to be ignored or missing in real cases. The Mack-Jan example was tailored to illustrate all of the parameters. It was not tailored to bring out any noteworthy advantage of BD over BA.

Examine Case Histories: Such cases can be imaginary or actual. The main difference is that they are formulated by someone else. This can tend to make personal involvement less than in the two types of practices above. However there are some advantages. Cases formulated by others may bring out features that one would miss by considering only ones own cases. Examining a variety of such cases also saves the time involved in formulating the number of cases needed to master the use of parameters.

Examine Concepts: Reasons for finding a concept useful may vary considerably. Those of us who find concepts useful merely because we enjoy conceptual study may want to start with this practice, altho engaging in some of these other practices should also prove useful. However most people find concepts useful because of their paraceptual applications. They may find a direct examination of BD and related concepts only helpful if done briefly and occasionally. However since the integration of BD is both more elaborate and more precise than is the integration of BA, some use of this practice may be needed. As an analogy, many fans pick up their whole net for football by watching and discussing games and spend little time devoted primarily to examining football concepts, altho doing the later is occasionally helpful.

Other DP Concepts: Altho BD is one place to start, it may not be the best place for everyone. In particular, there may be other DP concepts whose advantages over their ordinary counterparts are easier to appreciate. There are at a multitude of DP concepts whose ordinary versions people know, altho they may not know that they know them. These concepts include significance, behavioral roles, behavioral perspectives, deliberate action, characteristics, behavioral maxims, communities, reality concepts, world reconstruction, etc. After the 2008 conference this paper will focus on those we decide might be useful as an initial starting place. It will also suggest how the types of practices indicated above might be applied to some of these concepts in a way that provides an elementary introduction to a central portion of Descriptive Psychology. For now we merely sketch some ideas for several of these.

Significance: Altho this concept is one of the parameters for a behavior description, it does not depend on BD. Moreover a wide variety of actual cases are easily brought to mind and are easy to state. Likewise it is easy to create imaginary cases. The Mack example provides a simple case where in shopping for salmon and obtaining mackerel instead, he was doing something more than this. He was obtaining ingredients for the next day’s dinner and stocking up on mackerel. Something that did not come out in this example, but which his sister might have mentioned, was that in stocking up he was avoiding the need to shop frequently. One of the main benefits of using the DP concept of significance is that its advantage over the ordinary concept is easy to see, especially when applied to ones own actions. Looking at the significance of what we plan to do (or have done) can help us act more effectively.

Behavioral Roles: The DP concept set {actor, observer-describer, appraiser-critic} has the advantage of being very close to ordinary concepts. DP provides a perspective that treats these as interrelated roles. The advantage of this should be easy to illustrate. In the Mack-Jan interchange, these roles are all apparent, but unless this interchange was expanded, the advantages of thinking about these roles might appear to be trivial.

Behavioral Perspectives: The DP behavioral perspective concept has four main perspectives, with the esthetic perspective including three sub-perspectives. To compare these with our ordinary perspectives, it might be better to organize them as six perspectives, limiting the term ‘esthetic’ to one of its sub-perspectives. It might even be useful to begin with some subset of these perspectives. In the Mack-Jan interchange, Mack’s perspective seems more prudential than hedonic, while Jan’s seems more hedonic than prudential. Other perspectives may also have been involved, altho this was not especially apparent. Consulting Mack’s sister we would find that having a stock of food was not only a matter of prudence for Mack, it also gave him an esthetic satisfaction to be able to survey this stock.

Deliberate Action: We routinely distinguish between intentional and unintentional aspects of actions. Mack intended to spend under $15, but he might have done so unintentionally. We even recognize acting without what we would usually call an intention. Mack opened his eyes when awoke that morning, but this was much more an automatic response than a matter of intent. To act with intent is to do something on purpose. This can be done either with or without considering option. Mack considered the options to buying salmon or cornmeal before he went shopping, but when he saw the cornmeal he put in his cart without considering options. This act was done with intent, but not with deliberation.

Characteristics: As with significance, altho this concept is one of the parameters for a behavior description, it does not depend on BD. An ordinary account or of Mack’s behavior in the shopping episode revealed his frugality trait and some of his attitudes towards salmon and mackerel. Other characteristic could also have been gleaned. With a few more ordinary accounts of his behavior in other situations, a number of his other characteristics could be imagined. This could be done without an ordinary characteristic concept and then compared to using the DP character concept. In general most people would probably find it difficult to give a systematic exposition of someone’s characteristics, as this is seldom called for. An advantage of DP is that it can more easily bring relevant ones into focus.

Behavioral Maxims: DP has an extensive collection of Maxims. Altho these might be used most effectively in connection with BD, they can also be used with an ordinary understanding of BA.
Maxim B7a below is a modification of Maxim B7 from Place. It is used in Maxims for Behavior Description to illustrate how a Maxim coupled with a systematic understanding of characteristics can add a perspective on an account for behavior.

Maxim B7a If a situation S calls for a person P do X then P will do X, unless.

A. P cannot do X, or

B. P does not recognize that S calls for doing X, or

C. Doing X will be for P to choose less valued behavior potential, or

D. P could do X but has a strong reason for not doing X, or

E. P could do X but is unwilling to do X, or

F. There is some other account of P doing something other than X.

Imaginary Case: On May 1, Ben and Ann decide on a three-phase project. They commit themselves to present a finished version to a client Monday morning May 23. Each phase should take about 2 working days. Before Ann can work on Phase 2, Ben must complete Phase 1. They will then complete Phase 3 together. Ann wants Ben to begin immediately. He says he has other urgent matters to attend to, but that they have plenty of time. On May 9 he has still not started. Ann is beginning to worry. He promises to start soon. He begins a week later, completing Phase 1 on Friday May 20. Ann cancels her weekend plans. Working late into the night and starting early on Saturday, she completes Phase 2. Working Saturday evening and all day Sunday they meet the deadline. Ann complains to Ben that he should have started on May 9, to allow a margin, but at the latest on Friday to allow six regular working days for the time they anticipated. She adds this should have been obvious to Ben and that he knows that she hates to work on weekends.

Ann is acquainted with Maxim B7, but when Kay quotes it, Ann says it is not because Ben cannot start a project before the last minute, he just won’t. Kay turns to Maxim B7a. Here is a sketch of what was said. Ann and Kay agree that the situation called for Ben to start at the latest on May 13. Ann has already focused on Clause E, (that Ben could have but was unwilling). Kay indicates that Clause B (he does not recognize what the situation calls for) gives her a better perspective. From what she has said about Ben in the past, this is typical of the way he does things. By the time he started, he may have seen that the situation called for him to start earlier, but he could not see this until it was too late. Furthermore he did not see that his behavior would result in so much inconvenience for Ann. Ann responds that Ben is intelligent and should have recognized all of this. Kay reminds her that recognition of what a situation calls for is not just a matter of what he knows, but what he takes as real, i.e. what he will act on. He may know that 6 days are needed, but he acts as if other matters take precedence and that he can start a little later and still complete Phase 1 by the time it is needed. Furthermore, altho Ann tells Ben that she hates working on weekends, she has not made this real to him. She has never actually refused to use a weekend to complete a project. When Ann reluctantly agrees that perhaps Clause B provides a better perspective, Kay indicates that she actually finds Clause A fairly plausible, and that a number of Ben’s traits show why Ben could not do what the situation called for. Ann actually agrees, saying that it is his attitude, and this needs to be changed so that he can do things in a timely fashion in the future. Kay points out that Ben’s behavior is not only an expression of the kind of attitude he brings toward a project, but also that this is indicative of a procrastination trait that may be harder to change. Ben never has his personal taxes done on time, he is late for appointments, etc. This trait relates to a deeper trait, linked to Ben’s self-assigned status in his world. To be able to start early violates this status of being an important person with so many demands on his time that he must always work overtime. Kay also indicates that values are involved and that Clause C could provide some additional perspective.

APPENDIX: SOME CONCEPTS FROM DESCRIPTIVE PSYCHOLOGY

This appendix gives some of the main features of some DP versions of concepts that are ordinarily used to think about persons and what they do. For further explanation or for other concepts see Concept Encyclopedia on the Descriptive Psychology Section of conceptualstudy.org.

Behavior Descriptions Parameters: The considerations used to organize a description are referred to as parameters. These parameters are taken from things we might ordinarily say in talking about something an individual did, as was illustrated in the main text. Of course, our ordinary descriptions are likely to be less systematic and may indicate only those features of interest for the purposes at hand. The paradigm case of a systematic behavior description uses all of these parameters to describe an action or a course of action X by a person called the actor. The person giving the description is called the observer. The observer and actor can be the same person. An observer can give a behavior description in which there is more than one actor. The observer can be a team working together to give a behavior description.

¨ Identity (I) specifies the actor A for X.

¨ Wanting (W) indicates what A intends to achieve by X.

¨ Knowledge (K) has to do with what A knows and uses in relation to X.

¨ Know-how (KH) has to do with the competencies A displays relation to X.

¨ Performance (P) encompasses the processes that A is implementing.

¨ Achievement (A) is what X accomplishes, what difference it makes.

¨ Characteristics (C) includes some of A’s characteristics that are being expressed by doing X.

¨ Significance (S) includes what else is being done by doing X, what importance X has for A.

This behavior description concept provides a tool for bringing various aspect of behavior into focus. The parameters used and the detail to which they are developed will depend on the observer’s purposes in giving the description. Understanding the refined versions of concepts in our ordinary net for understanding persons can provide tools anyone can use to enhance their behavior potential (as discussed in The Potential Impact of Descriptive Psychology). Ossorio has refined and systematized concepts from our public ordinary net. In doing so, it uses and refines other concepts from that net. To adequately understand these, a person must already have competence in working with a number of ordinary concepts in addition to ordinary versions of person concepts.

Characteristics: There are a number of characteristics we use in thinking about behavior, traits and attitudes being indicated above. A more extensive list includes those below.

{Traits, Attitudes, Interests, Styles, Abilities, Knowledge, Values, Embodiment, Capacities}

These characteristic concepts are formulated in relation to behavior in ways that are compatible with the ordinary usage suggested by these terms. For instance, to support the claim that Rick has a strong interest in professional football, you could indicate the number of games he watches and the conversations he has about it. Likewise, in claiming that a dog has a friendly attitude towards strangers, just indicate the number of times he has welcomed them. To say that Mack has the trait of being thrifty we would note that he not only saves money on groceries, but also takes many other opportunities to save money. Altho there are alternative ways to organize and specify characteristics, everyone uses some version of characteristics in thinking about what persons do. In this sense, some version of a characteristic concept is crucial for any person. A similar remark applies to some version of a behavior description concept.

Deliberate Action: The person concept being used involves the concept of deliberate action. Ossorio briefly characterizes deliberate action as intentional action in which the actor knows what he is doing and is doing it on purpose. This means that deliberate action is usually behavior in which the K-parameter involves the actor knowing two or more alternatives on which to act. Moreover, the W-parameter involves the actor having varying degrees of wants in relation to these actions. This concept also includes having the competence to engage in and to distinguish between the various options.

The Person Concept: Below are features of a paradigm case of a person, the later portions of which were gleaned from the introduction to Place. The paper entitled Person Concepts gives a fuller formulation, with allowable transformations to cover additional cases. For instance, in order to include a newborn child as a person, these features are modified by allowing them to be future expectations. That paper also indicates how to make this behavioral person concept blend with a widely used person concept that is not behavioral.

A person has a history in which deliberate action in a dramaturgical pattern is ubiquitous; where acting in a dramaturgical pattern means that a person assigns objects and events into positions in a drama of that person’s ongoing life. A person has sufficiently mastered a person concept to distinguish between persons and non-persons, at least most of the time. A person acquired the concept of a person by learning to act as a person in interaction with other persons. Moreover, a person knows how to act as a person in interaction with other persons.