I read an article recently on the evidence against trauma being stored in our bodies. It reminded me why I reviewed and removed the reference from our Better Conversations course when I came to be more actively involved in that project in 2022. I came across many of the same critiques and counterpoints the article raises and I decided that there was not enough evidence to convince me it was worthwhile following that path.
What was curious was how that article is perceived in some communities. An example of epistemic closure - a topic I will write about at more length in due course.
Epistemic closure is is a closed system of knowledge. For the community I’m thinking of, the article unravels many of the beliefs they hold about themselves and their practice. It is safer to deny, to pretend the science is not established on this one. In one way, that response preserves integrity but it also means you lose perspective, so your preferred approaches are less applicable elsewhere. I think this is akin to external validity or ecological validity in psychology.
I am also reading a fascinating book about educational technology. It suggests that when we create techniques to help us apply learning, those same technqiues (affordances) come with constraints that are helpful or that can bind use. Repeated application of such techniques in this way makes it difficult to move outside the constraints and you find yourself trudging down a path whether you wish too or not.
I’m wondering if this is one way of epistemic closure happening and why it is so important to keep going off track once in a while to understand other patterns and other worldviews.