‘Knowledge’ or ‘Theory’?
Recently, we were discussing what theory was. Mumbling that he preferred to think of it as “knowledge” rather than “theory”, our leader explained that group analysis was more like an art than a social science. Someone asked me how I felt about this.
“I regard group analysis as a social science”, I said. “To me, it’s an art”, the master insisted. He started telling us about this paper he had read by Tom Main: ‘Knowledge, Learning and Freedom of Thought’. Actually, he only spoke about the use of knowledge as a defence against thought. It reminded me more of Bion than Main, but that’s a moot point.
After saying that ‘knowledge’ was a better word than ‘theory’, he paused.
“Don’t you think that knowledge is more accurate than theory?”, another person asked.
“Well”, I replied”, “group analysis has theories. So, we would still need a definition of ‘theory’. Do you know a good definition?”
Nobody could come up with any, or something that remotely resembled an explanation. Instead, a male group analyst began raging about group analysis.
“Clinical or theoretical group analysis?”, I enquired.
“Clinical.”
The more he was steering away from the topic of theory, the less convinced I became that theory was irrelevant. Of course, neither irony nor wishful thinking provide solutions. Nevertheless, I said with a wry smile “if only we could rename ‘theory’ and call it ‘knowledge’, then everything would be all right.”
“Knowledge … theory, you’ll still need a definition”, a female group analyst commented.
Our leader agreed. We pondered the usefulness of definitions and the meaning of theory.
She said: “It’s derived from the Greek noun ‘theõria’, which could be translated as ‘contemplation’.” “Ahh”, he muttered and paused again. It was quite obvious that he had never really thought about how this unassuming, 6-letter word had been used in group analysis.
Clearly, we weren’t the only ones who suffered a blockage in communication during our meeting. I had noticed this in the group analytic literature as well.
“Why is it so important to you?”, my female colleague wondered.
“If I read another article in which theory is confused with concept, I’ll cry.”
“Don’t”, our leader said.
“But what’s the difference exactly?” Everybody was looking at me.
Scholarly articles are very useful when they provide you with the answer you’re looking for: “A concept is an abstract idea or a building block”, I read out loud. “Resonance is a concept.”
He let out another “Ahh?”, totally unimpressed by this explanation.
“Do you use theory as a defence?”, our leader enquired whilst turning toward another colleague.
“Maybe.”
“I like theory”, a female group analyst admitted. “It provides possible answers, spells out assumptions, crucial concepts and ideas, as well as putting forward complex arguments to say what exactly the meaning of a topic is.” She and I had read the same entry in the ‘Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy’.
“Fair enough”, our master responded, “but I still prefer the term ‘knowledge’. ‘Theory’ sounds so scientific.”
“You’re a fan of Lewin?”
“Old Kurt?”
“Yes. Lewin famously stated that there was nothing as practical as a good theory, because it would guide efficient action by turning knowledge into wisdom. Here’s your favourite word ‘knowledge’.”
Suddenly I could see a twinkle in his eyes.
“Go on then”, he said, “enlighten me, what did Lewin mean by ‘turning knowledge into wisdom’?”
Damnit, I dislike it when someone puts me on the spot. “I can’t”, I confessed. “But I can tell you how some online dictionaries have defined knowledge: it’s information and understanding about a topic. You can gain knowledge from education.”
Our matrix was developing in mysterious, but fruitful, ways. Raising her eyebrows, a female group analyst queried whether the conducting of groups, which could result in gaining knowledge about the matrix, was the same as “a theory of the matrix”.
Another male colleague clarified that it wasn’t. “You know that the sun rises in the East, because you’ve gained this knowledge from looking at the sun in the morning. But knowledge is not a theory”, he said. “Okay”, our doubtful training group analyst uttered, “I get it, ‘the sun rises in the East’ isn’t a theory.”
“Exactly. You could say that theories are overall perspectives from which we view the social world. Or they critique normative societal assumptions. Theories can offer a different understanding. Adorno’s theory of philosophical and aesthetic truth, for example”, a young, female colleague said.
Slowly, slowly, our non-believer warmed up to the notion of theory.
“In physics theories are important”, he admitted. Glancing at him, someone said: “The man with the unkempt hair, Einstein, left us his clever Relativity Theory. It guided the discovery of knowledge.”
“But, as we’ve just heard,’ theory’ and ‘knowledge’ are not the same”, the young female pointed out.
His grin suggested that we were perhaps able to agree on something after all. At least for a moment. Until something else bothered him:
“But what about this simple dictionary definition of theory? It says that theory can be a conjecture or speculation.” Looking pleased with himself, he waited.
“Yup, this means that theory can mean almost anything.”
“We need to agree on a definition that we can use in group analysis. Otherwise, the word ‘theory’ is meaningless”, an elderly female analyst said.
We remained silent for a short period of time, because we couldn’t agree. Then our leader, a training analyst, said: “I hate to say ‘I told you so.’ Let’s stick to ‘knowledge’ and forget ‘theory’.”
Group dynamics are often surprising. Even in our meeting the dictum ‘trust the group’ resulted in an unforeseen reaction that shifted the impasse.
“No!”, a prominent male colleague asserted. “What would happen to the group analytic theories that I’ve developed? Would you ask me to refer to them as ‘knowledge’?!” Obviously, he had formed a strong attachment to his theories.
“And if a psychiatrist asks you about group analytic theories, would you say there aren’t any?”
Looking unperturbed, our training analyst queried whether ‘knowledge’ was inferior to ‘theory’.
“All group analysis has to offer is ‘knowledge’!?”, another female colleague exclaimed. “I disagree. A theory of the matrix provides us with a theoretical perspective that can guide how we work with the dynamic matrix in therapy groups”, she said. This is much more than gaining ‘knowledge’ of the matrix.”
We were going around in circles. Unlike these neat theoretical cycles, where observation enables reasoning, generation of hypotheses and subsequent descriptive explanations, which are explicated and empirically tested so that the developed theory can be refined or revised, we were not engaging in ‘abduction’. Our conversation didn’t involve ‘deduction’ either. No designing of experiments to test whether ‘knowledge’ had made ‘theory’ redundant. Instead, our doubtful training analyst reiterated that our reasoning was nothing but a defensive use of ‘theory’.
“Sure,” I said.
But it wasn’t oedipal, we had not reached this level of maturity yet. Just pre-oedipal, we were stuck in the paranoid-schizoid phase and at the mercy of splitting. For the majority this resulted in an idealisation of ‘theory’ and the denigration of ‘knowledge’. In the case of our leader, it was the opposite.
For a few minutes we were debating again whether group analysis was a science or an art. Then it occurred to me that art also had theories.
“What about art theory? It’s not called ‘art knowledge’.”
Our training analyst had to admit that this was true.
“So … we’ll continue to use the word ‘theory’ in group analysis”, I suggested.
Groups are fabulous places. You never know what will happen. Our non-believer in theory surprised us all:
“Yes, let’s keep the term ‘group analytic theory’, and all the uncertainty surrounding it, until someone can make a convincing argument that we should abolish the word ‘theory’.”
I can’t see this happening, do you?
Cheerio.
Useful Reading:
Lewin K (1951) Field Theory in social science. Selected theoretical papers by Kurt Lewin. (ED Cartwright). New York: Harper & Row.
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (2023) Critical Theory (Frankfurt School) https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/critical-theory