Personalistic and Naturalistic Approach in the History of Psychology - Research Paper Example

Personalistic and Naturalistic Approach in the History of Psychology Personalistic and Naturalistic Approach in the History of Psychology Introduction Psychology is a discipline that focuses on analysis of human mind. It is therefore the science of human mind and behavior. Psychology is considered one of the oldest scholarly disciplines and the newest. The human nature and behavior can be traced back to fifth century BC. This is the time Plato and Aristotle and some other Greek philosophers were attempting to handle issues, which are of major concern to psychologists today. The ideas include motivation, learning, behavior, thought, abnormal behavior, and perception. This paper will examine the personalistic and naturalistic approach to history of psychology and look at how the concept of Zeitgeist relates to these positions. The paper will also focus on Rene Descartes’ philosophical ideas and be able to establish how his views relate to the two approaches to history of psychology. Contextual Forces in Psychology Schultz and Schultz (2011) note that psychology being a science did not develop in a vacuum but is part of a larger culture. He argues that the development of psychology is also due to the external forces that determines the nature and direction. The external forces include economic, world war, prejudice, and discrimination, Zeitgeist, social and political forces (Havern, 2012). Personalistic Position Personalistic approach to psychology holds that scientific events would not have occurred in any case the great men and women would not have appeared. The theory maintains that ‘the person makes the time’. The question that arose from this was, ‘is it the great men or women that cause progress or they are merely change?’ Boring (1957) in his study found out that they are neither of the two but are just agents of progress. In this regard, the approach views that progress and change in scientific history is attributable to the unique ideas of individuals. This means that progress and change are attributable to the desire and charisma of unique individuals who personally redirect the course of history (Schultz and Schultz, 2011). Naturalistic Approach Naturalistic theory suggests that ‘the times make the person’ or can make possible what an individual has to say. It therefore stresses on the obligation of the cultural, social and the intellectual environment within which someone who does investigations works and lives. The approach is of the view that progress and change in the scientific history are attributable to the Zeitgeist that makes a culture receptive to certain ideas but not others (Schultz and Schultz, 2011). Zeitgeist Concept Zeitgeist concept is based on the spirit of time. According to Zeitgeist concept, Napolean had social conditions that gave rise to a wish for conquering Europe. Due to his desire to succeed, different people of different caliber had to assume different roles. There had to be a commander for the army and Napolean happened to be the one. Zeitgeist however suggested that even if Napolean could not have been the one to take charge of being the army commander, then someone else could have assumed his role (Havern, 2012). The personalistic concept supports the Zeitgeist theory since personalistic theory implies that the events that took centre stage during the preparation for war would not have occurred without the existence of monumental figures like the Napolean. Zeitgeist relates to this by stressing the need for different people with different calibers who had to assume different roles in Napolean case. Both the Zeitgeist and Personality concepts also stresses on time factor. In this case, the personalistic concept is based on the fact that ‘the person makes the time’ which relates to Zeitgeist concept of the spirit of time. Going to war requires that a commander be there who guides the army. It is therefore a matter of those involved in the preparation for the war to determine the time. This best explains the personalistic approach to history of psychology. Furthermore, without the existence of great men like the Napolean, then scientific events would not have happened (Schultz and Schultz, 2011). The Zeitgeist concept also relates to naturalistic theory of psychology in a number of ways. Fist it proposes that in a war situation, different people must assume different roles in case there is the desire and the will for the war to be successful. In this regard, it stresses the need of the intellectuals just the same way naturalistic concept does. Secondly, both the Zeitgeist and the naturalistic concepts are based on the concept of time in explaining the history of psychology. Thirdly, both are based on the social, cultural, and external environment within which people operates. The naturalistic approach also holds that time is what makes the person. (Schultz and Schultz, 2011). Rene Descartes Rene Descartes is a famous French philosopher, mathematician, and scientist. He is argued to be one of the first major philosophers in the modern era to have made serious attempts to defeat skepticism (Lawson, Graham and Baker, 2006). (. His views have been very influential in the world. With regard to psychology, he attempts to explain the mechanism of the mind-body problem. This has been a controversial issue for many years. The eminent question that many scholars were not able to offer a solution to was the relationship between the mind and the body. It is for this reason that Descartes expressed his views on the relationship between the mind and the body. Schultz and Schultz (2011) notes that many people believed that the interaction between the body and the human mind flowed in one direction. It was believed that the mind had an enormous influence on the human body. Consequently, the body had little influence on the mind. The other view was that the body and the mind were dependent in the same way puppeteer and puppet is joined. For this reason, they suggested that the mind is like the puppet pulling the strings connecting it with the body (Schultz and Schultz, 2011). Descartes conceded the view and was of the opinion that the mind and the body were different in essence. He however went on to argue that the mind influences the body and at the same time, the body exerts a lot of influence on the mind than had been previously proposed. In his view therefore, the relationship between the mind and the body is not in one direction but is a mutual interaction (Schultz and Schultz, 2011). In this regard, I believe that this view best supports the personalistic concept of psychology. This is so because the personalistic view is based on the concept that progress and change is based on the will and charisma of an individual’s personality. That is, the person makes time. Descartes also believed that interaction between the mind and the body occurred within the brain since according to research, sensation travel to the brain and motion instigate within the brain. His view was that the brain is the focal point for the minds function. In this regard, I believe this help in supporting the personalistic approach, which is based on the view that it is the person that makes time. This means that a person has power over time the same way the brain has power over the body (Schultz and Schultz, 2011). Descartes’ Doctrine of Ideas Schultz and Schultz (2011) note that Descartes’s doctrine of ideas also contributed to the development of modern psychology. Descartes suggests that the mind has the capability of producing two kinds of ideas, which are derived and innate. Derived ideas in this case emanate from direct application of an external stimulus, which includes sight of a tree and sound of a bell. Therefore, derived ideas are outcomes of experience of the senses. He also suggests that innate ideas are not created by objects in the external environment but is instead created out of conscience or the mind (Lawson, Graham and Baker, 2006). Among the innate ideas identified by Descartes, include God, the perfection, infinity and the self. This view I believe well describes the naturalistic concept in which it is the external forces that determines what one does. This means that it is the time that makes the person. Conclusion From the discussion, it is evident that psychology as a science developed over time through a series of hypothesis, experiments and findings. This has been explained using the personalistic and naturalistic approaches. The essay has also been able to explain the Zeitgeist concept and ways in which it relates to personalistic and naturalistic approach to history of psychology. We have also been able to establish the contributions made by Rene Descartes in explaining the history of psychology. It also established Descartes how views relate to personalistic and naturalistic approaches. References Havern, V.W. (2012). Wade E. Pickren and Alexandra Rutherford. A History of Modern Psychology in Context. New York: Wiley, 2010. 380+ xxv pp. $115.00 (hardcover). ISBN‐13: 978‐0: Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences. Vol. 48 Issue 1, 30 Jan. 71-73. Lawson, R.B., Graham, J.E., & Baker, K.M. (2006). A history of psychology: globalization, ideas, and applications. New York: Pearson Prentice Hall Schultz, D.P., & Schultz, S.E. (2011). History of modern psychology. Tenth Edition, Belmont: Wadsworth, Cangage Learning. Read More