Thanks for your well-spoken response.
I guess my trouble in relating the two concepts is that I have
difficulty understanding the dichotomy that is often made between
"mind" and the physical brain's properties. It is often said, for
example, that one can't ever pinpoint a personality, therefore,
neuroscience will never be able to fully explain the psychology of
individuals. I don't understand how that assumption could be made.
Certainly if neural connections were mapped, amount of chemicals
present in the body were accurately measured, and genetic
predispositions were accounted for we would certainly be able to explain
more about a patient's personality than a position which stresses the
self-reported accounts of personality from the same patient.
Am I misunderstanding the humanistic position?