Behavioral Axiology & Leon Pomeroy, PhD introduce the "know thyself" tool.

Focusing for the moment on HVP-Valuemetrics (a new metric to be thoroughly distinguished from psychometrics; but, yielding all that psychometrics yields and much more), which is derived from Hartman's formal a priori theory of how human beings organize their values, valuations and moral reasoning, I want to emphasize how this value profiling methodology served as a merciful "empirical handle" on Hartman's general theory of values and morals even as I simultaneously conducted systematic reliability and validity studies of "the handle" that is HVP-Valuemetrics! In referring to Hartman's formal and general theory of values and morals I am simultaneously referring to the elegant explanatory and predictive mathematical model of the structure and dynamics of how human beings value themselves and the world including the nature of moral reasoning itself. The unique "metric" and " handle" I refer to as HVP-Valuemetrics is fully presented and exploited by me in the pages of... "The New Science of Axiological Psychology"

...Effectively transforming, for the first time in history, an elegant mathematical model of how values work for and against us, into a science of human value structures and dynamics the likes of which the world had never seen throughout the pages of history. Much as Galileo gave us natural science by applying mathematics to the physical world outside our skins, Hartman has given us moral science by applying mathematics to the world of values inside our skins!

A Tour of Horizons Concluded

1- Informative LInks: History 2-Book 3-Purchase 4.Demo 5-HVP Tool-Box 6-Technical Considerations 7- Resume 8.Gallery 9-Home 10-Preventive Medicine Books: "The New Dynamics of Preventive Medicine Series" 11-Published Research in the Fields of Neuroscience and Electroencephalography 12-Biomedical Research Published in "The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences" PREVENTIVE MEDICINE

History and Genealogy of the Pomeroy Family

Com drleonpomeroy@verizon.net

Last Updated: 06/10/08

In "The New Science of Axiological Psychology" (Pomeroy, 2005) I discuss the importance of new scientific thinking about values and morals as they relate to psychology and medicine. I examine a procedure for values appreciation, clarification, and measurement in the context of self and world. In the words of Bertrand Russell (1872-1970): "Not only will men of science have to grapple with the sciences that deal with man, but--and this is a far more difficult matter-- they will have to persuade the world to listen to what they have discovered. If they cannot succeed in this difficult enterprise, man will destroy himself by his halfway cleverness." With the publication of my book I now face such a task.

In recent years I became interested in the moral dimensions of psychology and medicine. My hypothesis is that obtuse, unchecked, "moral insanity" evolves into "clinical insanity" diagnosed and treated by members of my profession and that the future of preventive psychology lies in the promotion of moral education grounded in moral science rather than natural science or only religions and philosophies. It will take the enlightened secularism of axiological science to save religionists and historic natural science in the world of tomorrow!

Axiological science also is needed to advance preventive psychology and preventive medicine with societal "carrot" and "stick" policies promoting the virtues of individual self-reliance (as distinguished from entitlements) and rational choices, (as distinguished from hedonistic indulgence). Armed with a science of values and morals, supporting moral education, we stand a better chance of striking a healthier balance between individualism vs. collectivism that has eluded humankind down through the ages across ideologies and wars too numerous to mention.

The breakthrough that makes this possible is a paradigm shift unfolding in the pages of "The New Science of Axiological Psychology" whereby moral philosophy evolves into moral science complimenting the historic transformation of nastural philosophy into natural science some five hundred years ago.

My research effectively transforms philosopher Robert S. Hartman's mathematical model of value and moral phenomena into an empirical science of values and morals. This new science recognizes values in the world of facts and I call it Multipolar Science as distinguished from historic Monopolar Science. Multipolar Science because it is an integration of natural science and moral science the likes of which humankind has lacked throughout history. We now possess two distinct scientific enterprises covering values and facts in a manner that promises to bridge the divide between science and humanism as well as science and religion discussed in the writings of C. P. Snow in the last century.

Axiological Science and derivative Axiological Psychology represent long overdue new thinking about nature and human nature. My book is the story of two revolutions, two paradigmatic shifts, destined to clash with today's postmodernism and entrenched world views. The two revolutionary new paradigms unfolding in the pages of my book have the potential to change how we think about science and human nature forever at a time when science is increasingly viewed with cynicism and distrust.

Throughout history moral philosophy remained moral philosophy while natural philosophy evolved into natural science. This asymmetric evolution, this accident of history, has seeded today's world with tragically flawed civilizations (and their discontents!) culminating in an asymmetric war of civilizations in the 21st century. In our military and intelligence initiatives to protect the values of our civilization we must have a moral science initiative to give such activities a human face and voice.

Did I discover the empirical moral science the ancients dreamed of and wise men struggled without success to perfect since the European Renaissance (1400 A.D.)? ? No. I had the good sense to recognize what I was looking for in the achievements of American philosopher Robert S. Hartman, Ph.D. and his eminently testable theory of values and morals grounded in a mathematical model of habitual evaluative habits that come alive within us with use.

A good theory, no matter how good, is just a good theory until it acquires empirical "legs" to walk on at which time a good theory is transformed into a good science and Hartman's value theory, which he called "formal axiology," was no exception. My contribution to the evolution of empirical value theory lies in my validation studies summarized in the pages of my book entitled "The New Science of Axiological Psychology" in which I use the best tests and measures available to me as a scientist-clinician in the field of psychology. The emerging Pomeroy-Hartman Synthesis in the field of cognitive psychology gives rise to the new paradigms of axiological science and axiological psychology grounded in a scientific consideration of values and morals for the first time in the history of psychology and the social sciences. In my view this achievement is worthy of a Nobel Prize especially when one considers that Hartman had been nominated for the Nobel Prize many years ago for his theoretical work alone.

Many have attempted to read Hartman's book entitled "The Structure of Value" (Southern Illinois University Press, 1967) only to find it as difficult as Einstein's theory of relativity or Darwin's origin of species with the result that it remains a largely unknown and unappreciated discovery having profound implications for humankind in the present century.

What many failed to appreciate in both philosophical and psychological circles was that Hartman's theoretical contributions needed empirical support and that his derivative value profiling methodology (The Hartman Value Profile) stood as a merciful and handle on his theory and one that is easily tested employing psychological tests and measures. As it was "systems building" in the field of philosophy at the time wasn't fashionable and theory without supporting empirical evidence was never fashionable in psychological circles.

As a licensed clinical psychologist with a successful private practice and secure position as Senior Staff Psychologist and Chief of the Behavioral Medicine Unit at the outpatient clinic of a large medical center I made the decision to undertake empirical studies of Hartman's work funded by my private practice. In no time I evaluated the value profiling methodology and its clinical implications in my private practice and with encouraging results launched reliability and concurrent validity studies of The Hartman Value Profile (HVP) based on my clinical successes with it.

The validation studies that followed were very successful and from time to time I published findings and presented papers before the annual meetings of the Hartman Institute with resources at the University of Tennessee at Knoxville organized by former Hartman students and colleagues. I became a member of the governing board and was then elected Vice President and then President of this nonprofit institute devoted to the study of values, valuations, and moral reasoning employing the mathematical model of "formal axiology."

How the history of psychology failed to adequately study values scientifically and then incorporate the results in psychological theory and practice is something I had trouble understanding as a graduate student, an intern, a professor of psychology, and clinician in institutional and private practice. I sought a deeper understanding of values and studied the work of Allport, Kohlberg, and Rokeach who wisely acknowledged how the concept of value is at once the least understood, least studied, and most important concept in the field of psychology. In time I would find the clinical relevance I was looking for in the approach to values taken by philosopher Robert S. Hartman, Ph.D. whose early death in 1973 ended his promising approach to the the subject of values and their enormous impact on emotions, motivations, personality, and behavior.

Axiological science, and its foremost applications of HVP-valuemetrics and axiological psychology, is something I've been working on as my private practice on Manhattan's Upper East Side for some thirty-five years allowed; a private practice that funded was to fund my research and world travel leading to the publication of "The New Science of Axiological Psychology" by Rodopi Press, Amsterdam and New York, 2005. My work studying values from a clinical perspective is no casual love affair. It represents a significant investment of personal resources aimed at producing a reconstruction of psychology around values and morals in turn grounded in a science of values and morals rather than religion or philosophy alone.

My research represents the integration of two instances of converging psychological and philosophical thought, in the manner of interdisciplinary research, involving the Ellis-Epictetus and Pomeroy-Hartman Syntheses in the field of cognitive psychology. This project involved extensive collaboration with philosophers familiar familiar with Hartman's work; for, my own discipline of psychology had little to offer me of clinical relevance apart from the academic approaches of Allport, Kohlberg, and Rokeach. I found what I was looking for in the work of philosopher Hartman while his philosophical peers, and occasional psychologist, totally ignored his work.

Those with experience with interdisciplinary research know full well the difficulties and problems working across the divide of professional disciplines. The language and conceptual difficulties are real, not to mention problems of communication around competing and not always understanding or sympathetic personalities. In my case I had completed an interdisciplinary doctoral dissertation at the University of Texas at Austin involving psychology, biochemistry, biomedical engineering, computer sciences, and electrical engineering departments on the Texas campus. Even so I was not prepared to collaborate with philosophers who were initially impatient with my strict adherence to the scientific method and empiricism. They thought the mathematical model of Hartman and its a priori nature negated any necessity for reliability or validity studies until several enterprising individuals sought to market HVP-Valuemetrics, derived from Hartman's a priori theory, and ran into clients who insisted on reliability and validity data.

My success stems from my single minded determination to bring Hartman's work into the social sciences supported by income from my Manhattan private practice while I supported myself with a full time salary as Sensor Staff Psychologist and Chief of Behavioral Medicine, Outpatient Clinic, Harbor View Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center at Brooklyn. Having adjusted to the difficulties of interdisciplinary research as a graduate student at UT Austin I was equipped to survive the inevitable problems of such research in a field not familiar to journal editors or funding agencies. Embarking on this interdisciplinary adventure was something some academics do in response to publish or perish pressures. I had none of them. I had left academia for full time clinical practice and enjoyed what was essentially my "hobby horse" between patients. A hobby horse that few clinicians are likely to adopt, then or now, for reasons of relative unfamiliarity with advanced statistics, computer data processing and research in general. Besides most clinicians are exhausted after a day with patients and turning to research, or even writing, is alien to their way of thinking and need for rest and relaxation. A scientist-clinician is a rare breed and I am one of them.

I emphasize I found myself working in an area unfamiliar to peer review journals and editors. The more common sources of funding were not available to me as I sought to launch an investigation into the nature of Hartman's contributions to an understanding of values and morals involving a a precision language and mathematical model of the sort that I had encountered among learning theorists in my discipline of psychology. I was pleasantly surprised to discover such theoretical rigor and precision in the field of philosophy although it lacked the empirical component of the scientific method.

In the early years of my interdisciplinary research many of my philosophical colleagues failed to grasp the importance of empiricism in their application of Hartman's mathematical model of value and moral phenomena. They honestly failed to appreciate the importance of my work systematically validating Hartman's a priori "formal axiology" that worked so well for those seeking to employ this value profiling methodology in the context of corporate consulting.

My philosophical peers had little or no appreciation or understanding of science. It was an uphill struggle for me; but, over time I convinced them my work was very necessary if the world was ever to take Hartman's work seriously and they wanted the world to take their professor's and colleague's work seriously. I reminded them that not even Hartman's philosophical peers took his work seriously because it wasn't fashionable in philosophical circles at the time and philosophers are as much slaves to fashion as women can be when it comes to clothing. Naturally my peers didn't take Hartman's work seriously but for different reasons: there was no organized empirical evidence validating Hartman's theory or predictions. Formal axiology had no empirical legs to walk on. I was out there alone pushing to advance something I believed in but with precious little peer support in either philosophy or psychology circles at the time.

My work in the field of axiological science and axiological psychology also provides the scientific basis for tomorrow's moral education today in an age of expanding moral obtuseness and confusion. It is absolutely the scientific basis for a renewed societal sponsorship (using carrots and sticks) of the virtues of self reliance, rational health choices, modern ethics and medical ethics having profound implications for survival in the 21st century.

Our evolving Science of Values, and its integration with psychology, covers lots of ground because people "don't have values, they are their values." We now possess a science of values (axiological science; a science of that which most defines the human condition; namely, a science of values, valuations, and moral reasoning involved in man's search for meaning and the experience of transcendental values (faith, spirituality) wherever possible. Nothing is More Basic to Human Nature (Apart from the Nature of Brain Chemistry and the Human Genome) Than our General Capacity to Value. Nothing is more fundamental to Our Existential Search for Meaning, Spiritual Consciousness, Human Purposiveness, the Experience of Faith, and The Experience of Sensitivity to Transcendental Values (Producing the World's Great Religions) than our General Capacity to Value Ourselves and the World. The Science of Human Nature Must be be Grounded in the Science of Values and Morals (Axiological Science) while the Science of Nature is Grounded in the Science of Facts, Things, and Materials (Natural Science). The Former Dates from the Pomeroy-Hartman Synthesis Unfolding in the Pages of "The New Science of Axiological Psychology" and the latter from the Works of Galileo nearly Five Hundred Years Ago.

No longer is Natural Science or 500 year old Monopolar Science (Natural or Material Science), enough. Needed is a Science of Values in addition to our historic Science of Facts; for, there is no other way to deal with our values in our world of material facts.

Needed is a second science; a new science of values and morals made possible by the integration of two instances of converging psychological and philosophical thought unfolding in the pages of "The New Science of Axiological Psychology," (Rodopi Press, 2005) known as the Ellis-Epictetus and Pomeroy-Hartman Syntheses in the field of clinically relevant cognitive psychology.

Everyday we confront Values in a World of Facts where our tragically flawed civilization has given us an asymmetric evolution of a science of facts (natural, material science) without a science of values (axiological science). The result is "run away" natural science and technology (Monopolar Science) without moral science checks and balances (Multipolar Science) producing what Sigmund Freud has called "civilization and its discontents;" where "discontents" is a euphemism for the "moral insanities" of our age. "Moral insanities" that evolve into youth violence, terrorism and the "clinical insanities" diagnosed and treated by my profession of reactive "crisis psychology" without a proactive "preventive psychology" analogous to our slowly evolving practice of preventive medicine or proactive health and "wellness care."

This tragedy, this historic accident has resulted in Monopolar Science and crisis psychology and medicine stealing the show in a manner that continues to disappoint expectations leading to a growing tide of cynicism, disbelief and criticism of science as we've known it; our Monopolar Science of facts.

Emerging axiological science, leading to Multipolar Science, promises to restore our faith in science and the scientific method without which humankind cannot survive the challenges of the 21st century. You think this is merely gloom and doom talk? Then look at what's happening in your world right now which is best seen by those who have lived long enough to witness our descent into what is a "new normal." Many souls are numbed and desensitized to what ails our civilization and its discontents while others are succumbing to terrorism wearing the mask of fanatical religiosity bent on overthrowing civilization and its discontents. I write these words not as a philosopher, futurist, journalist or mainstream psychologist; but, as a scientist-clinician breaking new ground in my profession based on the precision language and discipline of a new science devoted to the study of values in a world of facts where facts have been studied by the old science for some 500 years.

What is Axiological Science?

Axiological Science is the science of values and morals never thought possible. It confronts the challenge of values in a world of facts and that which most defines the human condition; namely, values, valuations, and morals. It derives from the integration of two instances of converging psychological and philosophical thought found in the Ellis-Epictetus and Pomeroy-Hartman Syntheses unfolding in the pages of "The New Science of Axiological Psychology," and discussed elsewhere on this web site introducing axiological science and psychology to my students.

What is Axiological Psychology?

Axiological Psychology is the reconstruction of psychology around values and morals made possible by advances in the science of values and morals (axiological science) unfolding in the pages of "The New Science of Axiological Psychology. This textbook provides a model for all social sciences to follow in the 21st century and formally acknowledges the importance of values in our world of facts.

Axiological Psychology, grounded in axiological science, includes a value profiling methodology aimed at the identification and assessment of habitual evaluative habits informing, sustaining, and driving thinking, emotions, and motivations. This is a revolution in the field of science and psychology having profound implications for the wider world of the 21st century. This value assessment methodology is known as HVP-Valuemetrics as distinguished from psychometrics found in the field of mainstream psychology. It derives from philosopher R. S. Hartman's operational definition of "good" in our lives and his mathematical model of value and moral behavior. "The New Science of Axiological Psychology" systematically validates Hartman's theoretical work and employs this approach for the reconstruction of psychology around our emerging science of values, valuations, and morals.

The application of axiological psychology and HVP-Valuemetrics is found in the emerging field of "coaching" outside mainstream psychology. These pioneering entrepreneurs have demonstrated the validity of axiological science and psychology in their various consultations addressing problems arising in corporate cultures and bureaucracies the world over. Many of them are members of the Robert S. Hartman Institute with Resources at the University of Tennessee at Knoxville where annual meetings are held every October for the past twenty-five years. The rise of coaching is exploiting, defining and validating axiological science and psychology while traditional psychology theory and practice continues to ignore axiological science and axiological psychology. The American Psychological Association could not ignore the publication of "The New Science of Axiological Psychology" and attempted a review of the book discussed elsewhere on this web site.

A casual exploration of the internet will reveal how many business entrepreneurs have discovered the power and efficacy of axiological science and its derivative HVP-Valuemetrics in many and varied business applications. HVP-Valuemetrics " gets at " the "sources" of human behavior by tapping into the dynamisms of habitual evaluative behavior which so define the human condition and cluster around three core dimensions of evaluative behavior correctly predicted by Hartman's mathematical model of cognitive processing dedicated to valuation.

As a consequence of "cognitive radiation" out of core evaluative dimensions of the mind, supported by the brain, three three dimensions of thinking are produced. The three dimensions of thinking based on three dimensions of valuation, as predicted by Hartman and validated by Pomeroy, are the Intrinsic (I), Extrinsic (E), and systemic (S). The sensitivity, balance, and order-of-influence (priority) of these dimensions shapes behavior including consequent emotions and motivations. HVP-Valuemetrics identifies and measures the co-play and counter-play of three core dimensions of valuation (value-vision) generating a corresponding set of three axes of thinking giving rise to thought styles and belief systems in general including the Ellisonian Thought Styles commonly associated with problems in living (See "The New Guide to Rational Thinking," by Albert Ellis, Ph.D.).

The I, E, and S dimensions of value-vision lead to I, E, and S dimensions of thinking. HVP-Valuemetrics is to be distinguished from historic psychometrics aimed at revealing important vocational, clinical and personality characteristics. The growing number of business applications employing axiological psychology, axiological science and axiological valuemetrics reflects an ever increasing interest in personality and behavioral assessment in a world with expanding population densities and economic and cultural globalization. Underlying this new approach to behavior and personality assessment is the relatively "dark continent" of values and morals now discovered and "mapped" with axiological psychology methods drawing upon our evolving Multipolar Science integrating natural science (Monopoalr Science) and axiological science.

Any "technology" capable of assessing human values goes "straight to the heart" of human nature without "beating around the bush," as seen is the case of traditional psychology and psychometrics. Axiological psychology covers the wide range of "phenomena" commonly referred to as "human nature," and this spans the range from individual behavior to collective behavior such that the mental status of individuals, as well as societies (nation states and civilizations) may be assessed and in a word, "treated." For this reason our science of values and morals is a big deal, and even more so when you consider how our work points to "moral insanity" as one of the basic causes of "clinical insanity" diagnosed and treated by mental health professionals and here we distinguished between "mind disease" and "brain disease" where the former evolves "moral insanity." Moral insanity in turn involves issues of sensitivity, balance, and order of influence of three core dimensions of habitual evaluative behavior known as the Intrinsic (I), Extrinsic (E), and Systemic (S) dimensions of value-vision informing comparable dimensions of thinking. This "cognitive radiation" from an axiological base into thinking and feeling is the focus of the new science of Axiological Psychology!

Why are these new fields of knowledge important?

It demystifies good and evil, right and wrong, nice and nasty in an age of growing moral obtuseness and confusion. Apart from parochial, but not insignificant, values appreciation, values clarification, and values assessment, "Axiological Psychology" is important because it focuses on values and morals with the precision language of science in a manner that compliments historic, asymmetric, natural science, humanism, and the world's religions. It is important because it embodies the "birth" of a basic science of values and morals and its pioneering application to concerns of psychology and the social sciences. The integration of axiological science with today's popular cognitive psychology remains a paradigm (model) for all social sciences to follow in the 21st century. With "Axiological Psychology" we are witnessing the birth of "seeing" the world in a new way; in a way that is "green;" in a way that is wholistic; in a way made possible by the integration of our historic science of nature with our emerging science of human nature. This historic achievement, unfolding int he pages of my book, bridges the gap between science and the humanities, between science and the world's religions, discussed at length in the writings of C.P. Snow in the last century.

Our exploration of this new "frontier" amounts to a contribution to a better world. We invite you to become a part of this social movement without which "green consciousness" cannot flourish in the 21st century.

This web site is about my work and recently published book launching for the first time an empirical science of values and morals. It is a textbook covering my approach to values in a world of facts: a book that is loaded with data giving birth to an empirical science of values and morals for the first time in history. A book that applies this new science, axiological science, to psychology in a manner that creates a revolutionary new paradigm for all the social sciences in the 21st century! It achieves a reconstruction of psychology around a values never thought possible. My book has profound social implications far beyond the immediate fields of values research and psychology: in this respect the title is limiting and misleading!.

It is authored by a scientist-clinician with a history of interdisciplinary publications in the fields of biomedical and psychological research including publications appearing in such prestigious publications as "The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA," and "The Journal of Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology." I was also Associate Editor of the "Handbook of General Psychology" contributing to the education of graduate students in the field of psychology. I served as Editor-in-Chief of the "Journal of the International Academy Preventive Medicine" in the days when proactive, preventive medicine was being pioneered by a small group of physicians and scientists around the world; a group who founded the world's first international society of preventive medicine for physicians and doctoral level scientists in collaboration with Nobel Prize winning Linus Pauling, Ph.D. and world renown biochemist R. J. Williams. Professor Williams is remembered for his discovery of B-Vitamins and the book entitled "Biochemical Individuality" which inspired new thinking in the field of medicine and sounded the cautionary note concerning the use of population statistics "washing out' the individuality and uniqueness of individualized medicine tailored to the biochemical individuality of the patient. In my organization work pioneering predictive, preventive, anticipatory medicine I served as the Editor of the five volume series entitled "New Dynamics of Preventive Medicine" advancing new thinking in medicine centered on biodynamic and genetic considerations. I graduated with a Ph.D. in psychology from UT Austin after having earned an advance degree in biology from the University of Massachusetts at Amherst. I then served as Associate Professor in the recently organized clinical doctoral program of Long Island University under Chairman Gustav Gilbert, Former Chief Psychologist, Nuremberg Trials who authored "The Psychology of Dictatorship," and other books. I also collaborated with world renown psychoanalyst, author and editor Benjamin Wolman, Ph.D. It was Chairman Gilbert that inspired my study of German society and personalities involved in World War II and prosecuted in the Nuremberg Trials following World War II. In association with world renown psychoanalyst, Professor Benjamin Wolman, I collaborated in the editing of the "Handbook of General Psychology" published by Prentice-Hall. I am also a licensed Clinical Psychologist practicing in Northern Virginia where I also serve as an Adjunct Professor at George Mason University. Prior to relocating to Virginia I served as Senior Staff Psychologist and Chief of Behavioral Medicine at the Outpatient Clinic of the Harbor View VA Medical Center at Brooklyn. During those years I conducted a Private Practice on Manhattan's Upper East Side. Upon retiring from both I devoted five years to writing "The New Science of Axiological Psychology" while residing at Lunenburg, Massachusetts prior to my relocation to Northern Virginia in 2004. It was my private practice income that funded the extensive research summarized in the pages of my book. I was born and raised on a New England Dairy Farm, the eldest of five children. My interdisciplinary doctoral dissertation at the University of Texas at Austin involved the academic departments of psychology, computer science, biochemistry (Clayton Foundation Biochemical Institute), and Electrical Engineering (Biomedical Engineering). My background as a scientist-clinician involved with interdisciplinary research served me well when I reached across disciplines into the field of philosophy where I discovered the work of a little known philosopher by the name of Robert S. Hartman who had independently developed a mathematical model of value and moral phenomena that quickly captured my imagination as a psychologist in search of a deeper understanding of values and morals in the affairs of humankind. My focus on clinically relevant cognitive psychology stems from my years as a clinical post doctoral fellow at the Ellis Institute in Manhattan following graduation from UT Austin. I am a fellow of the Ellis Institute in Manhattan, Past President of The International Academy of Preventive Medicine, and Past President of The Robert S. Hartman Institute with resources at the University of Tennessee at Knoxville. My professional interests concern a scientific approach to values and morals as they relate to individual mental and collective (societal) health and well being. On this web site I introduce my work and list eleven reasons why "The New Science of Axiological Psychology" is an historic and highly significant publishing event; for it advances what I call Multipolar Science covering values in a world of facts, as distinguished from historic Monopolar Science covering facts. Historic Natural or Monopolar Science faces an ever rising tide of public disbelief, lack of confidence, cynicism and sharp criticism because historic Monopolar Science ignores and is absolutely incapable of dealing with, values in a world of facts which has given humankind a tragically flawed civilization with its legendary discontents (witness expanding youth violence and a decadent popular culture) made even more dangerous by the emerging phenomena of failed states with their growing numbers of discontents. Concerning values and morals, I am known to shout "wake up world" in the course of my pursuit of a science of values and morals and am known for my hypothesis that "moral insanity" evolves into "clinical insanity" diagnosed and treated by my profession. My focus on values and morals as a clinical psychologist in private practice pretty much defines my professional specialization. Welcome to my world. Reading what follows amounts to entering a very different world, and for the better!

Without a science of value (i.e., axiological science and psychology unfolding in the pages of "The New Science of Axiological Psychology") we face the following: 1. no science of mind; even as we continue to advance a science of brain, 2. no science of psychology, 3. no social science which will persist as a pre-scientific discipline without axiological science foundations, 4. no recovery from the plague of postmodern moral relativism and half-smart social constructionism (See Following Q&A), 5. no demystification of good and evil in the 21st century, 6. no deeper appreciation, understanding or development of transcendental values, 7. no common ground for international law in an age of globalization, 8. no moral education in an age of moral obtuseness and confusion, 9. no exploration of or appreciation of the relationship between "moral insanity" and "clinical insanity," 10. no elegant, moral, safe or effective defense of civilization against terrorism in the 21st century, 11. no resolution to the problem of psychology and medicine as the fastest growing, failing businesses in the world, and so forth!

This textbook is written for college students, the expanding community of basic and applied axiological scientists, and those with a special interest in a scientific approach to the study of values and morals in today's world. Sections of the book are easily read; while other sections are highly technical. The enormous implications for the wider world are noted but not developed. The author hopes to complete a book essentializing and "popularizing" (without dumbing down) the revolutionary findings unfolding in the pages of this text. In the meantime, remarks on these web pages, and an informative book review at amazon.com must suffice.

Background Links Published Research in PNAS Published Research in PNAS Book Information Book Information Book Information Former Editor of Medical Books Former Medical Journal Editor-in-Chief Recommended REBT / CBT Psychologist Practicing in Northern Virginia

Eleven Reasons Why the Publication of "The New Science of Axiological Psychology" is a Big Deal...With Implications Beyond Psychology and the Social Sciences:

Last Updated: 06/10/08

1. It is the fulfillment of the modern project of grounding values and morals in empirical science for the first time in recorded history.

2. It grounds psychology in an empirical science of values and morals; which in turn serves as a model for all social sciences, including medical ethics, in the 21st century.

3. It speaks to the question of how to organize good to fight evil given history teaches it is so much easier to organize evil than good in the world.

4. It marks the decline and fall of historic Monopolar Science and the rise of Multipolar Science. This is a big deal in itself for we face values in a world of facts with only a science of facts. It is a tragic accident of history that ancient wisdom and modern knowledge (note how we customarily use the expression "ancient wisdom," but never the expression "modern wisdom?" What does this tell us about ourselves?) have failed to give humankind a much needed science of values. Values and Facts cannot be studied with our one science, our science of facts, natural science born some four hundred years ago in the works of Galileo and then Newton. Natural science is totally "blind" to values and therefore largely "blind" to Mind even though it "sees" the Brain, so to speak. This is so because the nature of Mind is axiological and not molecular. The new science capable of knowing values and morals was born with the convergence of psychological and philosophical thought unfolding in the pages of "The New Science of Axiological Psychology" and known as the Pomeroy-Hartman Synthesis in the field of Ellisonian Cognitive Psychology. The result is Multipolar Science representing the integration of historic natural (material) science with emerging axiological (value) science. With Multipolar Science humankind enters a New Enlightenment capable of understanding values and morals, in a world of facts for the first time in recorded history. With this "wind in our sails" the 21st Century promises to become a New Age of Reason or American Enlightenment to be distinguished from what historians have identified as the 18th Century Age of Reason or European Enlightenment.

5. My book offers the promise of moral education as tomorrow's preventive psychology today where my thesis is that "moral insanity" evolves into "clinical insanity" where "insanity is defined as anti-self, anti-social as distinguished from pro-self, pro-social behavior. My book argues for societal sponsorship of carrot and stick policies supporting the virtues of self-reliance and rational health choices as basic to any preventive psychology or preventive medicine program in a world where psychology and medicine are the fastest growing failing business in the world! preventive psychology today where my thesis is that "moral insanity" evolves into "clinical insanity" where "insanity is defined as anti-self, anti-social as distinguished from pro-self, pro-social behavior. My book argues for societal sponsorship of carrot and stick policies supporting the virtues of self-reliance and rational health choices as basic to any preventive psychology or preventive medicine program in a world where psychology and medicine are the fastest growing failing business in the world!

6. It introduces the basic science of transcendental values and mysticism which are the building blocks of spirituality, faith, and the world's organized religions.

7. It provides a scientific foundation for culture-free, religiously-neutral, moral education without which societies, civilizations, and their historic discontents cannot hope to flourish much less survive. Consider how the rising tide of youth violence, popular cultural decadence, alienation, moral obtuseness and confusion renders the obvious inescapable.

We must respond now! But How? We break away from science as we've known it and turn to a new science, a second science, a science of values and morals to build moral education needed to protect minds. We address the dangers of the diffusion of responsibility and alienation epidemic in today's postmodern world preoccupied with social construction theory and blind to how natural laws determine more and psychosocial absolutes much as they determine the rules of composition, core transcendental values and the opeation of logic and mathematics which postmodern elites have lost sight of.

As to the growing epidemic of diffusion of responsibility and alienation from core, moral absolutes, consider the 1964 Genevese Case in Queens, New York or the Enron Case in Houston or the Virginia Tech slaughter of students at a "cathedral of learning" where students ought to be secure in the pursuit of education. Such events are "societal canaries" alerting us to the dangers of a tragically flawed society (and civilization) putting strains on the individual and collective alike. One of the important remedies lies in compulsory moral education, grounded in emerging axiological science and psychology providing the common ground needed in a world of ethnocultural and religious diversity. One of the root causes individual and societal diffusion of responsibility and alienation from self and core values "greasing the slippery slope" leading from "moral insanity" to "clinical insanity" is the failure of moral reasoning and discrimination. This is an ancient problem dramatized by the German people in the run up to Hitler's War and in their mindless "obedience to authority" thereafter as studied by Stanley Milgram fifty yeas ago. Germany snapped under Hitler and fell into a collective state of varying degrees of individual and collective moral and clinical insanity (pseudo-cultural clinical insanity. The weakness of the German people during this period persists among all peoples of the world and we must learn from the German experience as civilizations remain in the grip of run-away natural science and technology without moral science and moral education checks and balances. The remedy for what ails us all lies not in historiography but in the advancement of new thinking about values in a world of facts unfolding in the pages of "The New Science of Axiological Psychology," (2005) standing on the head and shoulders of philosopher Hartman's work unfolding in the pages of "The Structure of Value" (1973). Unfortunately, with little time to respond, the elites in various walks of life must independently examine the promise of axiological science and psychology and take this paradigm shift in the social sciences to the next level of a revolution in how we educate and govern ourselves. In the meantime I take some satisfaction in having advanced the Pomeroy-Hartman Synthesis in the social sciences as a contribution to resolving what Sigmund Freud referred to as "Civilization and Its Discontents;" even as half-smart psychoanalysis continues to erode the moral fabric of societies the world over.

8. It challenges the moral imagination of the 21st century suggesting that perhaps "moral insanity" evolves into "clinical insanity" destroying individual and collective minds and ultimately bodies. I distinguish between "mind disease" and "brain disease" noting how historic natural science remains forever incapable of understanding minds requiring a science of value in a world of facts as distinguished from historical science of facts in a world of values.

9. As noted in item 4 above, my book builds on two historic instances of converging psychological and philosophical thought, some hundred years after the historic split between psychology and philosophy took place, embodied in the Pomeroy-Hartman (2005) and Ellis-Epictetus (1955) syntheses in the field of clinically relevant cognitive psychology emerging with the publication of "Reason and Emotion in Psychotherapy). The metasynthesis of these two events giving rise to axiological psychology is aimed at collectives and individuals or "Civilization and Its Discontents."

10. Finally, my book addresses the tragic flaw in the character of civilizations and societies made worse by an accident of history: the asymmetric and ominous persistence of run away natural science and technology without moral science checks and balances contributing to growing trends of domestic and international acts of terrorism. The urgency of this situation is intensified by our failure to match military and intelligence initiatives in the defense of our values and our civilization with moral science and moral education initiatives. An American moral science initiative puts a human face and voice to such necessary measures while permitting America to gain the moral authority it needs in the defense of its civilization and all civilizations.

A military and economic power, such as America, ought to invest in the advancement of basic and applied moral science and moral education initiatives in order to be seen as a force for good in the world as a great representative democracy defending its values warts and all. I would argue this nation has a moral obligation to do so! We are a historic product of the Age of Reason rather than an age of materialism and corporate greed, and so much more. Our nation ought not rest on the laurels of its founding fathers who were the sons of that age of reason, but strive to reaffirm, protect, and advance what the world has come to know as the American Experiment in freedom. With our constitution guiding us let us engage the challenges of the 21st century and the unfinished business of America and Civilization having to do with the evolution of Natural Philosophy (e.g., Alchemy and Astrology evolves into the Natural Sciences of Chemistry and Astronomy respectively) without the co-evolution of Moral Philosophy into Moral science until by the publication of "The New Science of Axiological Psychology." This asymmetrical accident of history, leaving us with a tragically flawed civilization, is something that concerned British scientist and author C. P. Snow in the last century when he wrote "Two Cultures and The Scientific Revolution," and other books on the subject. Snow argued we must find a way to bridge the dangerous gap between natural science and the humanities and I argue in the opening decade of the 21st century that Multipolar Science is such a bridge (integrating Galileo's historic natural science with tomorrow's science of values and morals today).

11. It systematically validates the value profiling methodology variously known as Axiometrics and HVP-Valuemetrics derived from Hartman's mathematical model of habitual evaluative behavior producing beliefs, belief systems, ideologies, attitudes, thought styles and so forth; all of which drive emotions, motivations, and behavior. "HVP" stands for Hartman Value Profile. Even a casual web search will reveal many entrepreneurs who have successfully incorporated this methodology in their business models the world over. The success of such business applications is consistent with the empirical findings summarized in the pages of "The New Science of Axiological Psychology;" which is a story that goes beyond the birth of axiological science or axiological psychology: it is a story having profound implications for humanity in the 21st century and a story that must not be eclipsed by climate change, weapons of mass destruction, the eruption of super volcanoes, or the death of stars in the cosmos; for it concerns the more immediate threat involving how humankind threatens the existence of humankind.

Conclusion: The "New Science of Axiological Psychology" is aimed at many audiences for it embodies a wide range of implications for humankind ranging from providing an alternative to traditional psychometrics, a reconstruction of psychology and the social sciences around values and morals, a resource for building trans-national, culture free, moral education curriculums, a foundation for reviving the virtues of self-reliance and rational health choices in preventive medicine, a demystification of good and evil in the modern world, a basic science foundation for medical ethics, a moral science initiative to match necessary military and intelligence initiatives in the defense of civilization, a foundation for finding common ground in all the world's religions, a basis for the appreciation of transcendental values, faith and spirituality, to a providing common ground for the development of international law in an age of globalization, and so forth. The wide range of implications for humanity found in this book exist because when one's subject is values and morals one ends up dealing with the many expressions of human nature; where the general capacity to value, and therefore reason, uniquely define what is special about human nature.

Last Updated: 06/10/08

Leon Pomeroy, Ph.D.

P.O. Box 7135, Woodbridge, VA 22195, USA

The Right Structure Demystifies and Brings GOOD AND EVIL, RIGHT AND WRONG, NICE AND NASTY into Focus

Q & A June 2007...

1. Question:

So!….Ego, the drive for power, often helps some people feel fully alive and right in their skin, probably out of a desperation to feel that way in the face of diminished or undeveloped intrinsic strength? They're doing the best they can with what they got, round and round, in a way that never gets them what they really want or need while making things miserable for the rest of us and themselves in the long run?

Dr. Pomeroy:

Yes! Bad axiology (negative habitual evaluative habits "coming alive" within us) drives out good axiology (positive habitual evaluative habits "coming alive" within us). Intrinsic well being is about oneness with self, oneness with others, and something bigger than both involving basic existential mysticism originating in natural laws as well as social constructions. Naturalistic mysticism is something everyone "falls" into and "gravitates towards" in