Emergence of Psychology - Research Paper Example

? The Emergence of Psychology By The Emergence of Psychology Introduction The history of modern psychology begins in the middle of the 19th century. The emergence of psychology took place in America after the modeling of mental philosophy. Psychology emerged from philosophy and it developed rapidly as an academic discipline. Over the past 150 years, it has spread widely in the American colleges and universities. The coverage of the psychology curriculum as designed by Rutgers is of interest to the academic overview and thus academic psychology evolved in America. Psychology has seven different phases, some of which include the philosophical antecedents, early physiological and experimental psychology, applied psychology and behaviorism, psychoanalytic movement, and contemporary movements (Sawyer, 2002). This essay will discuss the philosophical assumptions concerning the causes of human behavior, the impacts of the ideas on the history and the current trends in psychology, the account of either the personality or the naturalistic approach on psychology, and finally the importance of the people’s contribution to the history of psychology (Seirafi, 2013). Comparison of different philosophers and the various assumptions A closer analysis of the views of each of the theorists in the stages of development of psychology should begin with George Berkeley of 1685-1753, who existed in the antecedents of cognitive psychology. In his opinion, human behavior emanates from the perceptions of the individuals. In addition, he also believes that the source of perception is God. Immanuel Kant in 1724-1804, played a major role in defining the prerequisites needed to meet the empirical of science in psychology. His contribution was in the level on the rise of experimental psychology. Ian Pavlov in applied psychology and behaviorism demonstrated that behavior can result from conditioned associations and thus these conditions can be merged with environmental stimulus and naturally occurring stimulus. Psychology seeks to answer questions such as why human beings behave the way they behave and why human beings should necessarily think the way they think. Identification of major perspectives thus becomes the best way to characterize the different approaches taken to answer the questions that psychology poses. The major perspectives are a representation of assumptions that are fundamental that are behind the research questions. In addition, the method and procedures for research in order to answer the questions posed by psychology are considered (Sawyer, 2002). Most of these major perspectives all define psychology as a discipline, which interests itself in studying the behavior of human and the mental process. At the same time, it involves and covers a large part of the ground, which causes the mental processes, and the causes of behavior do not appear clearly. However, this essay seems to give the reader a clear view and understanding of the perspectives underlying the philosophical foundations and the methods of research. Finally, the essay considers outcomes of the research that arises from the practitioners and researchers (Seirafi, 2013). Argument of Sigmund Fred Looking at the major perspectives, which include the psychodynamic perspective, t6he behavioral perspective, the bio-psychological perspective, cognitive perspective, socio-cultural perspective, evolutionary perspective, humanistic or existential perspective, and feminist- post structural perspective among others (Seirafi, 2013). All these major perspectives of psychological help to explain the nature of human behavior in broad ways. Psychodynamic perspective has been popularly associated with psychology as a discipline for the past century. It is also known as psychoanalytic psychology. A theory developed by Sigmund Fred, a neurologist trained in the medical field, which concerned personality is of critical significance in this paper. The theory made the assumption concerning the human behavior. In his theory, he stated the motivation of human propelled by conflicts between instinctual which in most cases happens unconsciously from the forces of psychology. Sigmund refers to these intrapsychic elements as the id, ego, and the superego. The rate of the spread of this psychodynamic theory is very high due to the strength of the explanations that it gives concerning human behavior. The therapeutic method of Freud, psychoanalysis, identified the underlying conflicts between the structures of intrapsychic and later gives remedies by bringing them to consciousness (Barratt, 2013). The approach of Freud, referred to as the insight therapy became very popular. He also contributed to the first theory of development of human personality. This states that the development of human advances through the stages of psychosexual stages. The stages vary depending on various factors, which include developments of behavior and psychodynamic and the challenges associated with the development processes. The fact that Freud recorded the methods and the results he found in his research establishes his use of scientific approach. He comes up with the psychoanalytic theory and uses the following methods in his research, these methods include, study analysis and a qualitative study, which prove not a scientific method. Following the development of the psychoanalytic theory by Feud, other people such as Carl Jung and Alfred Adler, Margaret Mahler, and Jean Piaget and Erik Erikson, the famous developmentalists, made the research concerning the psychodynamic theory and eventually came up with the same assumptions. The common dynamic of which they all ride on states that the dynamic mind of an individual, the conscious and the unconscious states of the mind, influences the behavior of human beings. Production of the motives of the behavior and the processes of thinking emanate from the interaction of the elements of the unconscious psyche (Seirafi, 2013). Argument of John B. Watson In the sector of the behavioral perspective, John B. Watson, uses the ideas expressed by people like Ivan Pavlov and other theorists, to ensure that the method scientific. John B. Watson suggests that psychology concerns with the behavior observed outwardly only. Therefore, this made them build on a science of observable behavior. Many assumptions about the causes of the behavioral psychology were not upheld as a result the assumptions were not admitted. The fact about the unconscious dynamism of the mind is considered fictitious and thus basing on it becomes a waste of time. John B. Watson suggests that psychology is based on behavior that is observable and controllable. In the 20th century, behavioral perspective gained a very high value, hence it was highly demanded for training in the fields of education and industry (Pickren & Rutherford, 2010). On the other hand, some of the critics argued that behaviorism to some extent is viewed as dehumanizing. However, John B. Watson and other critics decided to carry out a research concerning classical conditioning. Eventually, B.F Skinner, explained the defended expertly the process of operant conditioning as he responded to the individuals who criticized behaviorism (Seirafi, 2013). Another major perspective of learning behavior is the Bio-psychological perspective. This is a scientific perspective that studies human emotions, behavior, and mental processes. This biological basis assumed includes the biochemistry of behavior, associates with the transmitters of Neuro and hormones, the psychophysics of perception and sensation, and genetics and heritability. The psychology of the physiological, psychoneuroimunology, neuroscience, and Psychopharmacology, all are the inclusion of biological perspective. The biological perspective has its basis on reliable scientific methods used in its development. Its efficiency on the variety of research is limited and controlled. The main reason as to why the research methods become quantitative in most cases is because of the it is very efficient and produces results that can undergo replication and are general hence can also be used in the evaluation of the whole population. Biological psychology has many varied benefits, which include one, trade in psychopharmaceuticals, the understanding of the illness that attack the mental states of individuals and thus providing valid solutions for some disorders that may prove very adverse, and finally, providing equipments for diagnosing the brain which would lead to the study of neuroscience (Seirafi, 2013). The cognitive perspective responds to the seemingly empty organism theory of behaviorism by developing ways of explaining human behavior. This perspective suggests that human behavior depends on the thinking capacities, and that thinking processes can at times control human behavior. Following the suggestion put across in the cognitive perspective, which states that human behavior gets its control of the processes of thought which include attention and memory, attitudes, the language used for communication, and the system of belief among others. The cognitive perspective makes people believe that the human beings include their conscious mind into the reason of their behavior since the largest part of the behavior of human beings emanates because of conscious processes (Pickren & Rutherford, 2010). The reason as to why the human beings behave the way they behave and do things the way they do best explained by the thought process, plays a major role in the explanation. These thought processes include the belief systems, the systems of value, and the processes of thought, intelligence, and the reasoning. Therefore, the cognitive perspective suggests that the human behavior is based on the thought processes and thus human beings are very capable of attaining control over their behavior (Seirafi, 2013). Argument of Ian Pavlov Another major perspective of the explanations given to human behavior is the socio-cultural perspective. This perspective states that social context, the environmental factors, the pressures received from the social grounds, and the influences from the cultures plays a very major role in influencing behavior. This compares to the behavior that the crowd watching a football match display. The crowd mentality influences the behavior of the human beings being that the environment where every person in the field is delighted, screaming, and shouting, others cheering the players in the field. Eventually in such an environment, human beings tend to behave in such a way that they fit into the crowd. In other environments, the culture of the place determines the behavior of the particular people in that environment. For example, in the Muslim community, where culture places a level of stringency in feminine dress code, and define moral values for unmarried people. The females from such a culture become very faithful to their marriages (Seirafi, 2013). All the people in the world behave according to the environment that surrounds them and the influence from the social authority. The rules of the authority may also influence the behavior of the human being in a particular community. For example, the government may decide to set up strict rules forbidding or allowing alcohol consumption of the people. This encourages the people in the country to drink carelessly hence, they end up being careless drunkards. Therefore, socio-cultural perspective outlines that human behavior depends on such factors. The social psychologists suggest that these factors exert very high forces and very direct explanations of the causes of human behavior and thought processes (Brannon, & Feist, 2010). This contrasts with the behaviorism theory described above that focuses on the intrinsic factors that affect behavior. The evolutionary perspective explains that the human behavior and the thought processes result from the evolutionary processes. The assumption of biology regarding the biological evolution of human beings is the survival of the species. Therefore, evolutionary perspective seeks to explain the reason from of the behavior of human beings resulting from processes supporting the survival of the species (Barratt, 2013). The humanistic or the existential perspective came into being as a reaction to the determination and the pessimistic nature of the psychoanalytic perspective. The main reason as to why the humanistic perspective was to help in support more of the optimistic views suggesting that human beings get their motivation that result to their behavior, from the creativity and the productivity of the response of their social and environmental factors. On the other hand, the existential part of the humanistic perspective suggests that human beings live in the world whereby they have to choose the paths that they intend to pass in their lives (Sawyer, 2002). The best aspect about the humanistic aspect is that it focuses on the subjective aspect, the experience of the mind while in a conscious mode, it also looks for ways to solve the problems faced by the human beings, and it emphasizes on the potential of the human to cultivate and grow positive behavior. The philosophy of humanistic perspective also looks at the diversity, confronts, and faces the reality. It makes judgments depending on the realistic grounds. It considers both the best and pleasurable parts and the painful parts of the human behavior in the real world situation. It also considers the good and the bitter part of the human behavior at the same time (Brannon, & Feist, 2010). According to Pickren & Rutherford (2010), the humanistic perspective states that human beings have choices in their behavior, they pose the free will to choose the act that is best for them, and they should also have the responsibility over the consequences of the behavior they chose. The underlying difference between the humanistic perspective and biological perspective is in the assumptions that the causes of human behavior depend on the human intrinsic factors, choice, and free will, which is the opposite of the biological perspective, based on the determination of the biological causes. The merging of the existential and humanistic perspective came about because the two perspectives based on the same idea of free will and choice and responsibility of human beings toward their behavior (Seirafi, 2013). Argument of Michel Foucault The feminist-post structural posits that all organized knowledge has a political push behind it and should be examined based on personal rights and benefits. The theory enlightens us that knowledge is power and that its holders of its language construct it and determine how resources are distributed. The political theory of psychology and knowledge acknowledges the views of all the assumption being that diversity is quintessential for survival. The proponents of this theory are committed to an epistemological position on issues and their biases based on self-interrogation. This theory also arose as a reaction to Michel Foucault, who has posed a strong criticism of the societal structure of power and the inequality that surrounds it. The methods and the results of science have favored men a great deal. However, the feminist perspective criticizes the practices of men and brings to the attention why women should have some considerations in the political sector (Brannon, & Feist, 2010). Summary The general summary of the naturalistic and personalistic approaches to the philosophy of the psychology of human behavior outlines the main ideas of the naturalistic and personalistic theory. Following the historical development of scientific psychology, two main views emerge. These views included the naturalistic and the personalistic theories. The personalistic theory stated that some of individuals’ posses a unique characteristic feature that they are able to perform some extraordinary things. This quality allows them to shape their course of history with many ideas. This idea is generally referred to as the genius. Genius is the power of the human beings to control their human behavior. Human beings can choose the best behaviors that they can follow and making sure that they also cater for the consequences (Barratt, 2013). On the other hand, personalistic theory is still highly upheld today. People are able to name the individuals that have made the perception of human behavior to change from the way it used to exist from the past without any problem. Individuals like Napoleon, Hitler, Abraham Lincoln, J.F. Kennedy, and Martin Luther King have greatly influenced and perpetuated change in the historical perspective of human behavior through the evident personality differences that they depicted. Therefore, the society upholds the views of personalistic theory. However, the naturalistic theory holds the views that the history does not change because of the ideas of any individuals but instead the period lived by those individuals shape the history (Seirafi, 2013). Conclusion The psychology of today bases of the rich disciplines and varied history. This makes the original psychology to differ greatly from the contemporary psychology practiced currently in the field. For an individual studying psychology, they need to take a lot of time in their research to make sure that they understand the origin of psychology so that they can be able to understand the underlying mechanisms that define behavior, and bridge the existing gaps. An individual should make sure to know the beginning of psychology, dating back in the beginning of academic psychology in America and take a keen consideration of the developmental processes of the psychology. The philosophical study of human behavior is broad and thus it requires much time and attention to its studies and research (Brannon & Feist, 2010). References Barratt, B. B. (2013). Emergence of somatic psychology and bodymind therapy. S.l.: Palgrave Macmillan. Brannon, L., & Feist, J. (2010). Health psychology: An introduction to behavior and health. Australia: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning. Pickren, W. E., & Rutherford, A. (2010). A history of modern psychology in context. Hoboken, N.J: John Wiley. Sawyer, K. R. (2002). Emergence in Psychology: Lessons from the History of Non-Reductionist Science. Human Development, vol. 45, pp. 2-28. Seirafi, K. (2013). Organizational epistemology: Understanding knowledge in organizations. Berlin: Springer-Verlag. Read More