Foundation of a New Science and Wundt - Term Paper Example

Foundation of a New Science and Wundt s Foundation of a New Science and Wundt The philosophical, social and scientific conditions in Germany in the 1800s which were the foundation for the emergence of the new science of psychology The beginning of new scientific psychology is usually traced to the 1879. During this period, Wilhelm Wundt established the first psychological laboratory. Earlier in 1862, Wundt had emphasized the possibility of a different psychological discipline. However, the major events that made him, together with other psychologists to the discovery of scientific psychology are traced to have occurred even earlier. These events lie at the pivot of modern science, notably, in the works of scientists like Charles Darwin and Isaac Newton. Newton’s work in physics significantly influenced psychology. The invention of the scientific method that involved observation, hypothesis formulation aimed at predicting events as well as outcomes. In addition to the ensuing testing of these hypotheses by further observing and experimenting, gave way to scientific psychology. In this way, this method facilitated the revelation of the previously more general explanatory laws. These principles remained relevant to the present scientific psychology. The new science of psychology was predominantly influenced by various social, scientific, and philosophical conditions in Germany. The Social and scientific conditions were as a result of the fragmentation of Germany, which enabled the country to have many Universities. The people focused on education for national culture and they also accepted biology as a science. This enabled scholars to study experimental physiology. The Philosophical circumstances were as a result of the contributions made by different psychologists in the domain of psychology. In the field of science, Johannes Miller made significant contributions to the development of the new science of psychology (King, Viney & Woody, 2009). He notably enhanced the understanding of the speech, hearing and voice. In addition, he increased the understanding of the physical and chemical properties of blood, lymph and chyle (King, Viney & Woody, 2009). Miller composed important works, which were of a particular philosophical tendency. His first work concerned the most vital facts about human and animal sight. His second work looked into the complicated psychological problems (King, Viney & Woody, 2009). His research also led to the development of the reflex action theory in 1830. These influences made Miller become a leading light in the experimental physiology and morphological treatment of zoology. During the period of Müllers work, several contributions were made to physiological science. He gave order to many facts, formulated general principles and revealed to physiologists how contemporary discoveries in chemistry and physics could be applied to their work (King, Viney & Woody, 2009). The appearance of Miller’s work, elements of physiology, marked the start of a new period of as far as the study of science is concerned. As a result, the fields of comparative and human anatomy and that of chemistry as well as other departments of the broad body of physical science were invented to aid in the investigation of physiological problems. The most significant part of Miller’s work was the one that concerned, nervous action as well as the entire mechanisms of the sense (King, Viney & Woody, 2009). In his work, Miller stated the principle that the type of sensation that follows the stimulation of any sensory nerve does not dependent on the method of stimulation, but on the nature of the sense organ. Therefore, mechanical stimulation, pressure, and light acting upon the optic nerve and the retina always produce luminous impressions (King, Viney & Woody, 2009). This principle led to the development of the law of specific energies of the sense that have significantly impacted positively on the new science of psychology. The new science of psychology was also influenced by the works of the German physicist and physician known as Hermann von Helmholtz. Hermann made significant contributions to numerous widely varied sectors of modern science of psychology. He was majorly interested in the overall area of psychophysics (Lang, 1987). This area concerns the study of the relationship between behavioural capabilities and confines of the human perceptual structure and the environment. For instance, he is known for his additions and extensions to the theory of colour vision called the Young-Helmholtz theory (Lang, 1987). This theory explains that the main colours of light (blue, red and green) are represented in the visual systems of individuals by three specialized cells called cones, found in the retina. As a result, he is known for his theories of vision, mathematics of the eye, colour vision research, ideas on visual perception of space, empiricism (Lang, 1987). He also worked on topics like perception of tone and the speed of neuronal conduction. In physics specifically, Hermann is known for his work in chemical thermodynamics and electrodynamics. Others include theories on energy conservation, and the mechanical foundation of the general thermodynamics (Lang, 1987). Hermann is also known as a philosopher. He made various contributions to this field. For instance, he formulated a philosophy of science, gave an insight into the science of aesthetics. He also generated ideas relating to the law of nature and that of perception, and also about civilization of power of science (Lang, 1987). His sensory philosophy formed the basis of Wilhelm Wundt’s work. Wundt, who is considered as one of the key founders of experimental psychology, was Helmholtz’s student. Wundt described his research more explicitly than Helmholtz as a type of empirical philosophy (Lang, 1987). He studied the mind as a separate item. In addition, Helmholtz emphasized on the importance of materialism, with close focus on unity of body and mind. In 1851, Helmholtz took part in the revolution of the field of ophthalmology. He achieved this by the inventing the ophthalmoscope (Russell, 2003). This instrument helped in the examination of the interior part of the human eye. During this time, his interests were increasingly inclined to the physiology of the senses (Russell, 2003). Helmholtz’s publication on physiological optics presented empirical theories on the colour vision, depth perception, and motion perception. He also described the role of unconscious implication (Russell, 2003). He continued working on several editions of his book for many decades, while continually updating his work. This was as a result of a dispute between him and Ewald Hering, who had an opposing view regarding colour and spatial vision. This conflict later led to the division of the discipline of physiology. New science sociology was enhanced by the works of Ernst Heinrich Weber, a German physician. He was among the founders of experimental psychology. He is considered not only an influential but also an important figure in the sectors of psychology and physiology both during and beyond his lifetime (Sprung, (a) & Sprung, 2001). His research on touch and sensation, together with his focus on proper techniques of experimenting, provided insight into new directions as well as areas of research for future physiologists, psychologists, and anatomists. Weber also demonstrated his interest in psychophysics (Sprung, (a) & Sprung, 2001). In fact, he studied this area from a wider perspective. He focused on all the sensory systems and the way they operated. He also introduced the concept of just noticeable difference. This concept referred to the smallest possible difference occurring between two stimuli that a person can see. It was used of in all sensory systems, that is, taste, sight, touch, sound and smell (Sprung, (a) & Sprung, 2001). It can also be applied in experimenting with several sensory systems. He discovered that a constant equation arose for each. Weber significantly contributed to experimental psychology. For the better part of his career, he worked with his brothers and partner, Theodor Fechner. He completed research about the central nervous system, anatomy and function of the brain, auditory system, and circulation, among others (Sprung, (a) & Sprung, 2001). Similarly, Weber conducted a large part of research in sensory psychology and sensory physiology. His main items of contribution in the experimental psychology included hydrodynamics, experimental wave theory, Weber’s Illusion, and Two-point Threshold Technique. The experimental wave theory was interested in studying the flow, as well as movement of waves in elastic tubes and liquids. Hydrodynamics, on the other hand, was concerned with the discovery of laws and how to apply them to circulation (Sprung, (a) & Sprung, 2001). Through his research, he came up with a detailed explanation of hydrodynamic principles in blood flow. In 1827, Weber made another key finding. He accounted for the elasticity of vessels in blood movement into the aorta continuously to the arterioles and capillaries. The two-point threshold technique was useful in map sensitivity as well as in touch perception of the body by the use of compass method (King, Viney & Woody, 2009). It entailed setting the points of the compass at variable distances for an individual to see the distances whereby the point of these compasses were seen as two distinct points rather than a single point. Furthermore, Weber also tested some ideas of sensation. These included the terminal threshold, that is, the highest intensity a person could sense before this very sensation could not be felt any longer (Sprung, (a) & Sprung, 2001). Weber’s illusion was an experience of deviation between two points when there was movement of stimulation over areas that were not sensitive. It also entailed convergence of two points when there was movement over sensitive areas. Therefore, his use of precise measurements, multivariate experiment, and study on sensory physiology and sensory psychology laid the foundation for permitting experimental psychology as an area of study. He also offered new ideas that enabled the 19th-century fellow psychologists to expand. Other factors that impacted on the emergence of new scientific psychology originated from the works of Gustav Theodor Fechner. His 1860 publication is said to be the first work on experimental psychology (King, Viney & Woody, 2009). Some historians have dated the origin of experimental psychology from this publication. To begin with, it is worth noting that Weber was not in essence, a psychologist. It was in fact Fechner who recognized the importance of the research carried out by Weber to psychology. Fechner was greatly interested in starting a scientific study about the relationship between the body and the mind. This study was later referred to as psychophysics. Majority of the research conducted by Fechner was focusing on just-noticeable differences, and the measurement of psychophysical inceptions (King, Viney & Woody, 2009). Fechner also invented the method of constant stimuli, the psychophysical method, and the method of adjustment. These methods are being used currently in the new scientific psychology. After gained training in both physics and medicine, Fechner greatly expanded on the thoughts and concepts of Weber. These contributions have not only rendered him the founder of psychophysics but also that of experimental psychology. According to some historians, Fechner, rather than Wundt, should be accredited as the founding fathers of psychology (King, Viney & Woody, 2009). They argue that Fechner paved the way for psychology by coming up with an important connection. He said that there is a direct link between the sensation received by the mind and the stimulation received by the body. He added that for both phenomena, measurement is possible. His contribution that the study of thought, as well as the relationship between the body and the mind, can be, therefore, be quantified and measured (King, Viney & Woody, 2009). This noble contribution gave rise to the emergence of Fechners Law. Armed with the techniques from psychophysics to complete this task, modern psychologists have had the opportunity of measuring behaviour just like other physical objects. Although this quantitative connection between body and mind may not appear outstanding today, it was radical during then (King, Viney & Woody, 2009). In addition, it legitimized the work of the modern psychologists in their attempt to quantify each and every type of behaviour. Describe what Wundt understood by psychology, in theory and how the lab was run Wilhelm Wundt was born in Neckerau village in Baden, Germany 1832 (Greenwood, 2003). His father was a Lutheran pastor. His father’s assistant, the church’s preacher, tutored and shared a room with him. He joined the school of medicine in Berlin, Tubingen, and Heidelberg. However, Wundt had more interest in the scientific aspect rather than in the medical profession (Greenwood, 2003). He became a lecturer in physiology in 1857at Heidelberg. He later pursued a course in physiological psychology that dealt with the border between psychology and physiology; that is, senses and reactions. For Wundt, psychology was indeed a part of philosophy. He believed that psychology was a perspective about consciousness and could be examined through experimentation. Conversely, he had another part of psychology (Greenwood, 2003). This was known as folk psychology. It dealt with art, customs, myth, language, and objects which could not be investigated in a similar manner as those of a person’s inner experiences. Rather, these objects needed a mode of explanation that was suitable for their non-physical but external phenomenology. Therefore, Wundt defined psychology as incorporating two parts. The first part was experimental and was closer to psychophysics and biology (Greenwood, 2003). According to him, this component of psychology could be practically studied in laboratories. Völkerpsychologie or folk psychology was the other part of psychology. This part could, however, not be studied in laboratories (Greenwood, 2003). It was considered as closely related to anthropology and history, the social science disciplines. According to Wundt, this part of psychology could only be studied through examination of how individuals and their respective conscious experiences advanced in a social setting. Therefore, psychologists were to study the social and developmental processes that led to the development of individual consciousness. He however maintained that the experimental method could not be applied in this part of psychology. All the same, that message was lost to those generations of psychologists that emerged later (Greenwood, 2003). They held on the experimental approach coined by Wundt, together with the laboratory methods. They however ignored his völkerpsychologie. Wundtian psychology consisted of two distinct parts. One part was closer to biology and required to be studied using approaches derived from psychophysics. Wundt wished to outline and answer clearly psychological questions along the border of psychology and biology. He was to utilize the methods and apparatus that were developed by Helmholtz and the rest (Greenwood, 2003). He had the belief that an individual’s conscious could be studied experimentally. Wundt held upon reaction time as a dependable measurement of the rate of conscious activity. He started measuring response times under various complications or experimental conditions (Greenwood, 2003). For example, he learned that reaction times were relatively slower when subjects were necessitated to make judgments between two stimuli prior to making a response relative to when they came after the presentation of a single stimulus only. In his laboratory experiments, the focus was on self-observation or inner experience rather than on the behaviour of a subject. In other words, it was based on introspection. According to Wundt, it was required that members of both teams get involved in the experiment by performing three roles: those of observer, subject, and experimenter (King, Viney & Woody, 2009). The aim of the research was to maintain all external conditions and factors constant excluding one. This one variable could then be methodically manipulated with the verbal report of the mental experiences of the subject as the data. In the process, the interest’s variable was changed systematically. In his experiments, the members of the teams were highly knowledgeable and trained on the question being investigated. Therefore, the last introspective reports presented by the subjects only became valid after thorough practice and understanding of the equipment. Wundt, therefore, viewed psychology as a new science which fit a reasonable sequence after three fields including physics, chemistry, and biology. However, for his young science, Wundt claimed new ground. It was to be distinct than all the remaining disciplines since it examined consciousness, rather than the result of chemical reactions, interaction of matter, or physiological processes (King, Viney & Woody, 2009). He was uncertain that the mind of a human being was open to controlled study. According to his conviction, consciousness was natural, real, and approachable. Despite his beliefs, he was aware of the several challenging tasks that faced him. He was also conscious of the counterarguments from other philosophers and scientists. Several scientists for instance, desired to give materialistic explanations for psychological occurrences (King, Viney & Woody, 2009). These explanations were resisted by Wundt since he argued that consciousness was not something like a product of say, a chemical reaction. He viewed knowledge as a developmental and historical process that was ever flowing. Consequently, he maintained that the study of consciousness could be done by observers who were well trained and could, therefore, reflect on their individual consciousness in controlled conditions in the laboratory. Wundt’s Theory of Psychology Wundt, was at heart, less an experimentalist than a theorist. His theories were based on the pivotal role of consciousness and the ability of a person to actively decide to attend to select parts of knowledge (King, Viney & Woody, 2009). He referred to his theoretical system as voluntarism since individuals chose the parts of their consciousness which they would attend to. Voluntarism can hence be marginally defined as the system of psychology that stresses on the role of conscious and unconscious choice of some parts of consciousness according to the history, personal feelings, and motivations. In order to understand the manner in which Wundt’s theory of psychology functioned, it is important to recognize that Wundt was not looking at behaviour but consciousness (King, Viney & Woody, 2009). For him, much of psychology entailed the scientific study of consciousness. He held on some assumptions. For instance, that knowledge could be accessed. He also assumed that trained observers were able to reliably report about the content of their individual consciousness. He called this the principle of actuality. This law maintained that consciousness was not a thing, but rather a process (King, Viney & Woody, 2009). Precisely, consciousness was an ever changing though continuous flow. He argued that consciousness had many sources. One source was derived from instincts or drives. These were incorporated in unconscious motives like thirst or hunger (King, Viney & Woody, 2009). These central reasons were related to valid states like displeasure and pleasure as well as goal avoidance and goal seeking. In addition, they could predict the future through memorization and learning. According to Wundt, drives formed the original raw material of consciousness, which was also a response to people’s sensation (King, Viney & Woody, 2009). For him, aesthesis led to perceptions. However, he stated that those perceptions were vague and general until the observers selected to focus on particular aspects identified individual attitudes through the apperception. Wundt also came up with a key theoretical concept of creative synthesis. This idea gave explanation on how different mental events united to form totally new and unpredictable cognitions. This theoretical concept was coined from the chemical combination of elements to form compounds. However, the difference between psychology and chemistry was fundamental and vast (Greenwood, 2003). The result of creative synthesis was not possible to predict earlier. In other words, psychology was not chemistry. Creative synthesis was hence how the brain responded to environmental stimuli to form the numerous number of continuously flowing events in consciousness (Greenwood, 2003). Therefore, it was the reaction of the brain to such events that produced the real psychological qualities like sour, sharp, sweet, painful, or meaningful decisions. Getting these attributes, therefore, requires a living brain that is attentive, awake and conscious. The theories developed by Wundt were both complex and challenging to understand. In addition, he altered them over the years. However, it is important to note that other psychologists, some of whom were Wundt’s students, substantially developed the theoretical ideas of Wundt and later passed them as his (Greenwood, 2003). Therefore, it would be incorrect to include Wundt as a member of the psychological movement of structuralism. This movement’s search for as well as identification of psychological features was new, distinct, and hence absolutely non-Wundtian. Structuralism was also different since it used the method of introspection. As psychology flourished after the emergence of Wundt’s disagreements and controversies, many sociologists came up with their views on sociological aspects. Much of Wundt‘s theorizing were lost in that hullabaloo (Greenwood, 2003). However, the laboratory experimental methods created by Wundt together with his students were not lost. With the growth and maturity of psychology, it did so still as an experimental science although its new specialists largely dished out with non-experimental sections that had been explained by Wundt. It is also worth noting that Wundt had several students who later shaped psychology. References Greenwood, J. D. (2003). Wundt, < em> Völkerpsychologie, and experimental social psychology. History of psychology, 6(1), 70. King, D. B., Viney, W., & Woody, W. D. (2009). A history of psychology: Ideas and context. Pearson/Allyn and Bacon. Lang, H. (1987). Color vision theories in nineteenth century Germany between idealism and empiricism. Color Research & Application, 12(5), 270-281. Russell, J. A. (2003). Core affect and the psychological construction of emotion. Psychological review, 110(1), 145. Sprung, L., & Sprung, H. (2001). History of modern psychology in Germany1 in 19th‐and 20th‐century thought and society. International Journal of Psychology, 36(6), 364-376. Read More