>One can reduce depression *in the abstract* to chemical activity in
>the brain. But in every person that chemical activity is a constituent
>in a unique history (an ensemble of social relations), which is so
>extraordinarily complex that neither now nor in the future can
>one elaborate a "science" that will apply to particular people. One
>can have a theory of neuroscience and one can have a theory of
>social relations. One cannot have a theory of the individual. So
>what can a psychological theory be *of*.
Central tendencies, techniques for analyzing the intersection of social & individual histories with biology, etc. Psychology is a social science, like economics, sociology, politics. None of them will ever be as precise as physics. Like I asked you once before, lit crit isn't terribly rigorous either, so why do it?
Doug