Transcript Document
History of Psychology 2008 Lecture 6 Professor Cupchik TA: Michelle Hilscher Office: S634 Office: S142C Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Office hours: Wed 1-2; Thurs 12-1 Office hours: Wed 12-2 pm Course website: Textbook: www.utsc.utoronto.ca/~cupchik Benjafield’s History of Psychology Bishop George Berkeley (1685-1753) George Berkeley, also known as Bishop Berkeley, was an influential Irish philosopher whose primary philosophical achievement is the advancement of what has come to be called subjective idealism, summed up in his dictum, “Esse est percipi” (“To be is to be perceived”). The theory states that individuals can only directly know sensations and ideas of objects, not abstractions such as “matter”. He wrote a number of works, the most widely read of which are his New Theory of Vision (1909), Treatise Concerning the Principles of Human Knowledge (1710) and Three Dialogues between Hylas and Philonous (1713) (Philonous, the “lover of the mind”, representing Berkeley himself and Hylas, named after the ancient Greek word for matter, representing the ideas of Locke). In 1734 he published The Analyst, a critique of the foundations of science, which was very influential in the subsequent development of mathematics. The city of Berkeley, California is named after him, by virtue of it growing up around the university there that was named after him, but the pronunciation of its name has evolved to suit American English. A residential college in Yale University also bears his name, as does the copyright library at Trinity College Dublin. He published his major works by the time he was 25 years old. Interestingly, he also sought to found a university for Indians and colonists in Bermuda. He knew little about ancient philosophies but he knew Descartes and Locke thoroughly. His major principle reflected the fact that he denied matter as such and affirmed mind as the immediate reality. Locke denied the innate ideas of Descartes but did not transcend this dualism. There were still two worlds, the one knowing about the other through experience. Berkeley cut the knot. The ideas themselves are the one thing of which we are aware. Esse est Percipi (to be is to be perceived). He argued that all qualities of perception, primary and secondary, are dependent on the observer thereby destroying the distinction. So the problem is not (1) how mind relates to matter (Descartes) nor (2) how matter generates mind (Locke) but rather (3) how mind generates matter (Berkeley). But this radical approach leads to solipsism, the belief that there is only one mind in which other minds exist only as ideas. As a consequence, collective thought is abolished. This position is not capable of disproof. It is merely a reductio ad absurdum. He felt that this approach would resolve problems in visual perception such as illusions. Example 1: Distance Consider the size of the moon and its distance from the earth. The idea that it is just so big and of such a distance from the earth cannot apply to the visible moon “which is only a round luminous plane of so many (30) visible points in diameter.” If someone were taken closer to it, the moon would have changed and appeared larger. So perception is not an illusion when esse est percipi: it is the consistency of objects that is the illusion and that requires explanation. Berkeley emphasizes the creation of perceptions by the mind. Distance itself cannot be seen in the sense that a tape measure extends from the eye to the object. Rather, it is an act of judgment based on experience. The perception of distance is a matter of sensation or idea. Continuing Example 1: Distance Secondary criteria of distance perception, including interposition, aerial perspective, relative size, and light and shade, play a critical role. (Relative movement has recently been added). Primary criteria include: 1. Converging distance between the pupils when objects approach. 2. Blurring when the object is too close to the eyes (but objects blur at a distance as well). 3. Straining of the eyes to keep them from getting confused. Example 2: Magnitude One might suppose that magnitude could be directly perceived from a true image on the retina. This would be according to Locke’s approach and the concept of primary properties but Berkeley did not believe in this. 1. Magnitude is not directly perceived because it depends on distance which is a matter of judgment. 2. Perceived magnitude does not correspond to the geometry of space. There is a minimum visible and tangible. This is the psychological principle of the limen (or threshold). So mind generates matter and we substitute for a theory of knowledge about objects a psychological description of objects. These ideas or descriptions are formed through experience and so Berkeley is clearly an empiricist. His theory of objects is associationist. The problem of meaning is resolved through the association of ideas. Aristotle has made the primary division of 5 senses and had the common sense to integrate them. Locke emphasized the sensory nature of ideas. Berkeley insisted that ideas were the most important but separated them according to the different senses. Accordingly, vision and touch are prior to form. There are no abstract forms. In terms of associationism: We hear the coach, then see it, then feel it. Since the sensations are observed to constantly go together, they are spoken of as relating to one and the same thing… in this case, the coach. This anticipates Piaget’s concept of sensorimotor relations and the emergence of the schemas! 1. In relation to emotion judgment, we perceive the feelings of another person through changes in the colour of the person’s face. 2. In relation to language, meanings are attached to words through a process of learning or association. David Hume (April 26, 1711 - August 25, 1776) David Hume was a Scottish philosopher, economist, & historian, as well as an important figure of Western philosophy and of the Scottish Enlightenment. Although in recent years, interest in Hume’s works has centred on his philosophical writing, it was as an historian that he gained his initial fame and his History of Great Britain was the standard work on English history for sixty or seventy years until superseded by the History of England by T.B. Macaulay. Historians most famously see Humean philosophy as a thoroughgoing form of skepticism, but many commentators have argued that the element of naturalism has no less importance in Hume’s philosophy. Hume scholarship has tended to oscillate over time between those who emphasize the skeptical side of Hume (such as the logical positivists) and those who emphasize the naturalist side (such as Don Garrett, Norman Kemp Smith, Mark Powell, Kerri Skinner, Barry Stroud, and Galen Strawson). Hume was heavily influenced by empiricists John Locke and George Berkeley, along with various Francophone writers such as Pierre Bayle, and various figures on the Anglophone intellectual landscape such as Isaac Newton, Samuel Clarke, Francis Hutcheson, Adam Smith, and Joseph Butler. He was Berkeley’s successor. Like Berkeley, he was precocious and developed in relative isolation. He was extremely ambitious, a perfectionist with a restless and nervous personality. At the age of 28 he published three volumes titled A Theory on Human Nature. * He preserved the tradition that philosophy is basically psychological. * He re-emphasized Locke’s notion of the compounding of simple ideas into complex ideas. * He developed and made more explicit the notion of association. * He made an important direct contribution to modern psychology in his clear distinction between sensations and impressions, ideas or images. The distinction between impressions and ideas was fundamental. He sought to restore the word to its original meaning which was altered by Locke who used the term to include sensation. Definition: - An idea is the experience we have in the absence of its object. - An impression is the experience we have in the presence of its object. Both ideas and impressions are different kinds of experiences and were included by Locke under the term idea. What is the difference between impressions and ideas? The difference lies in their relative vivacity. The impressions (sensations, passions, and emotions) are more vigorous, lively, and violent compared with ideas. Ideas are relatively weak and faint and are used for reasoning and thinking. But: The faintest impression may be weaker than the strongest idea. He was aware that ideas in dreams, madness and violent emotion may approach the intensity of impressions. But he said that generally they are different in intensity. He also saw them as qualitatively different. He said that ideas are faint copies of impressions. In addition, both impressions and ideas may be simple or complex. - A simple idea always resembles a simple impression. - A complex idea, since it may be constituted of simple ideas in a novel manner, need not resemble an impression. - He regarded impressions as causing their corresponding ideas. So the world of real objects cannot be more tangible that the ideas which constitute man’s belief in it. If we reject innate ideas and primary or secondary qualities, what is left? Nothing but an ordered array of mental contents. What does he mean by causal relations? Hume thought of association as an attraction or “gentle force” among ideas whereby they unite or cohere. This is a form of mental mechanics. Two laws of association: 1. Resemblance 2. Contiguity in time or space Cause and effect are always contiguous in time or space. The perceived cause is always prior to the effect. If all knowledge comes through the senses, through what sense is the notion of causality perceived? He did not want a subordinate rational faculty. Necessary connection is a result of constant pairing of cause and effect… a “constant conjunction” of the two events. The perception of cause and effect is therefore based on psychological experience. Causality is a mental habit! Philosophically this is also related to a kind of skepticism. The world of real objects cannot be formally certified as anything more tangible than the ideas which constitute man’s belief in it. This led to doubt about the existence of g-d, the external world, or the personal ego. There can be no experience of a continuous entity called the self. The self is an abstraction from particular experiences. We have only data and not constructs. We, as empiricists, can only believe those constructs that represent sensory impression (perceptions of hot-cold, light-shade, pain-pleasure and each quality is experienced in isolation). RECALL: * Rationalism goes back to Plato and particularly to Aristotle’s doctrine of the rational “soul” as something above the nutritive and sensory functions of the individual. Rationalists believe in a special mental substance with its own inherent properties and which cannot be reduced to matter. * Christian theologians kept the idea alive during the Middle Ages. However, they emphasized destiny rather than nature and its attributes. * Descartes also described a thinking substance, res cogitans, which was distinct from physical matter. I am speaking of a nonmaterial rational principle that reveals itself in the facts of experience. * The Empiricists had asserted that Aristotle’s five senses were the sole source of knowledge. RECALL: * Opposed to this are mental faculties or functions or activities which can be classified and which imply pre-existing mental capacities. * They are revealed in experience but not created by experience. A faculty psychology does not deny the importance of observation. Rather, we must have a complete inventory of psychological functions.