Observable Human Behavior theory
The main difference between the field of observable human behavior theory and the fields of psychology and neuroscience, is the mind or brain. Psychology and neuroscience both concern the mind/brain. Psychology and neuroscience are two different views about what goes on inside your head. In contrast, observable human behavior theory is only concerned with classifying observable behavior and its results, nothing to do with what goes on inside your head.
Goals and Basics of LTOTM Theory
The goals of observable human behavior theory range from improving day-to-day life to scientific understanding:
Give people a tool to improve their relationships and life skills.
Define clear unbiased terminology for people to use in talking about others' behavior.
Create a reference point for people to better understand their friends, families, co-workers, cultures, history, species and themselves.
Unify the two lineages of personality theory—Jung/Myers-Briggs/Keirsey type theory and Plato/Keirsey temperament theory—by mapping each Jung/Myers-Briggs code letter and defining each personality type in terms of temperament order and expressivity order.
Make personality type scientific, by creating complete theory-based classifications of complex human behavior for which data can be observed, collected, measured and tested.
Differentiate observable facets of behavior for accurate data collection.
Provide a basis for neuroscience to relate to complex human behavior.
Observable human behavior theory is also only concerned with classifying behavior that varies by individual. These differentiated behaviors are called personality. For example, to say that someone blinked or opened a door does not do not convey any personality differences; to say they exhibited Logical Reason does. This book covers complex patterns of goal-oriented behaviors that differ for each personality, such as Logical Reason.
Differences can be seen even in the basic survival behaviors exhibited by all people, such as the different ways people eat. Basic survival behaviors may seem to be clearly separate from peoples' unique personality behaviors, but their complex personalities effect even these basic survival behaviors. Because of this, a complete theory based approach is necessary to fully understand human behavior.
Peoples' complex personality behaviors may not seem to be survival behaviors at first glance, but I believe that personality behaviors are survival behaviors as well. It seems to be a consistent scattering of different social behaviors in different individuals. This scattering seems to create a social behavior, unique to humans, that benefits of the human species as a whole. And very importantly, this unique social behavior, including language, seems to be the main reason people alone have been able to create civilization.
Even though this theory is not based on the brain, it is not saying the brain is not involved, I believe the brain is involved and is the major player in the differences in behavior. Analyzing the brain is just not necessary for classifying the behavior. Likewise, though the theory does not take into consideration what people have in mind, I do believe people have different thoughts, feelings, points of view, awareness and human experience. And I speculate that individuals of similar personality type have similar experience, fully in connection with their similar behavior.
Psychology versus Neuroscience
There are several debates in the fields of psychology and neuroscience over the mind/brain, what is and is not science and what is valid theory. I would like to make my position on the matter clear and in the following section, make clear the position of observable human behavior theory relative to psychology and neuroscience.
Psychology: There is little to debate here—the understandings of the mind that make up psychology cannot be observed, measured or tested—so psychology is not science.
Clearly psychologists observe human behavior while writing their theories, but they do not classify the actual behavior, they instead classify based on speculations on the human experience of the mind. Not to say that is a bad thing or incorrect, just that it cannot be observed or proven scientifically. Psychology provides an intuitive metaphorical understanding of the human experience and that is one element that science cannot achieve. Science can categorize human behavior and the function of the brain, but it cannot provide an understanding of the actual experience people have while they are conducting that behavior. This is where psychology comes in. I believe psychology is still a valid field, separate from science, that would fit well under the heading philosophy.
Neuroscience: Also very clear—the collected brain and nervous system data in neuroscience can be observed, measured and tested—so neuroscience is science, as the name suggests.
Neuroscience looks at how the brain works and at the corresponding human behavior. While trying to examine the brain relative to more complex behavior, there is a fuzzy area, because no complete theory-based scientific understanding of complex human behavior is used. That is a problem that LTOTM theory can hopefully help to solve.