Theoretically coherent and conceptually mature explanatory principles should make clear what are the essential conditions for replication of theory (not simply a demonstration based on weak analogies to poorly specified, largely stipulated and not even reductively well-constructed] mental [a term bandied about absent clear meaning in contemporary psychology — try to provide a useful definition of a mental event sometime; a useful exercise in placing on display the theoretical immaturity of psychological “science”] happenings.
Way to miss the point.
Stan Klein

There are a number of points in here, most or all of which I generally agree with, or at least understand the point of. But what does any of this have to do with the point I was making regarding Negative Psychology?

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.