Elaboration 2.1

Since the study of mind-science by Ladd, around the turn of the century, the professional name for it, 'Psychology' has become a by-word for pseudo-science and triviality knowledge. The normal term of 'Ideation' (that what is going on in a mind) thereafter, became banned because it would necessitate serious study in idea, in mind. As every 'real' mind-scientist knows, when there is a mind, there is that what mind consists of, namely ideas. Then, these ideas are not like objects, not motionless, not still, but are hectic activities. They wriggle and squirm, they fiddle and jostle, they vibrate and resonate, in short they are, what we call alive, active. It is therefore also normal to speak of the verb: to ideate, of ideation, of idealogy, of ideagenesis, idea-pathic, idia-syncrasy (a 'black raven' expression), and so forth. In the secondary world-language, Spanish, the verb 'idear', to ideate, is freely in use in literature (see Gald's for instance). None of the terms, now, are acceptable to the pseudologists because the mere acceptance would make them vulnerable to fundamental critics from college boys, those who studied ideas, when they ask for definitions, ask questions. It would mean that plants and animals, nay, every living cell in them, in us, had a mind, would ideate and this is contradictory to their mechanistic beliefs. They'd rather have our cells as being little machines, automata, robotic sections of robots. Psychology developed from mind-science, into a pseudology, a mechanistic view on life. It is like studying motorcars, their engines, fuel, steering, etc. in order to know where the drivers want to go. Instead of grasping that life USES mechanisms (physics) they think that alive MEANS mechanism, physics, and laboratories, mathematical trickery, etc. Indeed, many writers have concluded that what is alive, has mind, ideas. Haeckel clearly speaks of the consciousness (the mind, ideation) of the single cell, although the term consciousness is very confusing. It is, alas, true that we find the term ideation, only very sparsely in Snow, Tart, Schofield, Kline (who also coined the term 'Hypnodynamics'), James, Ladd, McDougall, Mikesell, etc. Yet, Plato and Aristotle were already studying ideation theory and general 'Ordening Theory'. (The science of Ordening is fundamental for EVERY other science and knowledge and idea. Ideas being that what understands order (meaning), and that what changes order (action) ). There is a very urgent need for a contemporary handbook of ideation theory. I would like to write it, but ..., how to get it printed? For the time being, we must do with e.g. Spencer. His genius enabled him to deduct from his (first law of Spencer) notion that: 'all causes have more than one effect', and from: 'all effects are causes', that necessarily, complexity in any structure (ordering) must increase (with time). This second law of Spencer, is a law of: necessity of evolution (of all structures). Lamarck, Darwin, Wallace, etc. only added to this in demonstrating that it was valid for living beings (ordering) too. BUT, let us beware of thinking that order, structure, is physical. It is non-physical ('that what is more than the sum of its parts'), therefore mental, life, ideational. Ordening is idea. Ordening Theory is the idea of it. Ideation Theory is that part of ordering theory that contemplates the non-physical ordening, the mental, the life, and ... itself.