{"title":"Residues of (Post-)Kantian Philosophy in Early Scientific Psychology and Hermann von Helmholtz’s Idealism","authors":"Liesbet De Kock","doi":"10.1093/acrefore/9780190236557.013.674","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"German scientist Hermann von Helmholtz (1821–1894) is widely acknowledged as one of the leading intellectuals and scientists of his time. Originally trained as a physiologist, Helmholtz contributed substantially to the fields of mathematics, physics, acoustics, ophthalmology, and the emerging science of psychology, amongst others. Not only did Helmholtz’s research interests cover a vast array of different topics, he furthermore paired his scientific endeavors with a continuous philosophical reflection upon the nature of science and knowledge, and of human cognition in general. Helmholtz’s philosophical interests were especially salient in his theory of perception, in which he attempted to reconcile his empirical viewpoint with insights derived from the idealist philosophies of Immanuel Kant and Johann Gottlieb Fichte. This dovetailing between empiricism and (transcendental) idealism has fascinated philosophers ever since the publication of Helmholtz’s work. Although Helmholtz famously rejected Kant’s theory of space, he considered his own theory of perception as a further elaboration and empirical confirmation of Kant’s and (to a lesser degree of) Fichte’s philosophical systems. Notwithstanding the abiding philosophical interest in the nature and extent of Helmholtz’s allegiance to German Idealism, the philosophical dimension of his work has not received the attention it deserves in the historiography of psychology. Revisiting Helmholtz’s intellectual relation to transcendental idealism, however, could not only help correct and enrich simplified accounts of his psychological and epistemological position, it furthermore provides a highly interesting illustration of the hitherto poorly understood relation between (neo-)Kantianism and the dawn of scientific psychology in 19th-century Germany.","PeriodicalId":339030,"journal":{"name":"Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Psychology","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190236557.013.674","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
German scientist Hermann von Helmholtz (1821–1894) is widely acknowledged as one of the leading intellectuals and scientists of his time. Originally trained as a physiologist, Helmholtz contributed substantially to the fields of mathematics, physics, acoustics, ophthalmology, and the emerging science of psychology, amongst others. Not only did Helmholtz’s research interests cover a vast array of different topics, he furthermore paired his scientific endeavors with a continuous philosophical reflection upon the nature of science and knowledge, and of human cognition in general. Helmholtz’s philosophical interests were especially salient in his theory of perception, in which he attempted to reconcile his empirical viewpoint with insights derived from the idealist philosophies of Immanuel Kant and Johann Gottlieb Fichte. This dovetailing between empiricism and (transcendental) idealism has fascinated philosophers ever since the publication of Helmholtz’s work. Although Helmholtz famously rejected Kant’s theory of space, he considered his own theory of perception as a further elaboration and empirical confirmation of Kant’s and (to a lesser degree of) Fichte’s philosophical systems. Notwithstanding the abiding philosophical interest in the nature and extent of Helmholtz’s allegiance to German Idealism, the philosophical dimension of his work has not received the attention it deserves in the historiography of psychology. Revisiting Helmholtz’s intellectual relation to transcendental idealism, however, could not only help correct and enrich simplified accounts of his psychological and epistemological position, it furthermore provides a highly interesting illustration of the hitherto poorly understood relation between (neo-)Kantianism and the dawn of scientific psychology in 19th-century Germany.
德国科学家赫尔曼·冯·亥姆霍兹(Hermann von Helmholtz, 1821-1894)被广泛认为是他那个时代的主要知识分子和科学家之一。赫尔姆霍兹最初是一名生理学家,他在数学、物理学、声学、眼科学和新兴的心理学等领域做出了重大贡献。赫姆霍兹的研究兴趣不仅涵盖了大量不同的主题,而且他还将自己的科学努力与对科学和知识的本质以及人类认知的持续哲学反思结合起来。赫姆霍兹的哲学兴趣在他的知觉理论中尤为突出,在这个理论中,他试图将他的经验主义观点与来自伊曼努尔·康德和约翰·戈特利布·费希特的唯心主义哲学的见解调和起来。自从亥姆霍兹的著作出版以来,经验主义和(先验的)唯心主义之间的这种契合一直让哲学家们着迷。虽然赫姆霍兹以拒绝康德的空间理论而闻名,但他认为自己的感知理论是对康德和费希特哲学体系(在较小程度上)的进一步阐述和经验证实。尽管人们对亥姆霍兹对德国唯心主义的忠诚的性质和程度有着持久的哲学兴趣,但他作品的哲学维度在心理学史学中并没有得到应有的关注。然而,重新审视亥姆霍兹与先验唯心主义的知识关系,不仅有助于纠正和丰富对他的心理学和认识论立场的简化描述,而且还提供了一个非常有趣的例子,说明迄今为止人们对(新)康德主义与19世纪德国科学心理学的黎明之间的关系知之甚少。