The Response to George Berkeley’s Philosophy in Twentieth-Century Danish Experimental Psychology: Edgar Rubin and Edgar Tranekjær Rasmussen

Jørgen Huggler
{"title":"The Response to George Berkeley’s Philosophy in Twentieth-Century Danish Experimental Psychology: Edgar Rubin and Edgar Tranekjær Rasmussen","authors":"Jørgen Huggler","doi":"10.1163/24689300-05101001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The purpose of this paper is to explore the reception of George Berkeley in a particular corner of 20th-century Danish psychology and philosophy. In contrast to philosophers, such as Peter Zinkernagel and David Favrholdt, Danish experimental psychologists, including Edgar Rubin and Edgar Tranekjær Rasmussen, made highly appreciative reference to the methodology and experimental observations of Berkeley and David Hume. This paper focuses on these psychologists’ interest in Berkeley’s ideas. I will first present Rubin’s path from a mosaic-like understanding of psychological phenomena (elemental psychology) to a holistic view, detailing what he termed adspective psychology and its method. I then turn to Rubin’s embrace of certain experimental observations made by Berkeley and, in particular, by Hume concerning the minima visibilia. The second part of the paper deals with Tranekjær Rasmussen’s interpretation of Berkeley’s work, and in particular of his immaterialism, his notion of God, and his critique of abstract ideas.","PeriodicalId":202424,"journal":{"name":"Danish Yearbook of Philosophy","volume":"88 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-12-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Danish Yearbook of Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/24689300-05101001","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to explore the reception of George Berkeley in a particular corner of 20th-century Danish psychology and philosophy. In contrast to philosophers, such as Peter Zinkernagel and David Favrholdt, Danish experimental psychologists, including Edgar Rubin and Edgar Tranekjær Rasmussen, made highly appreciative reference to the methodology and experimental observations of Berkeley and David Hume. This paper focuses on these psychologists’ interest in Berkeley’s ideas. I will first present Rubin’s path from a mosaic-like understanding of psychological phenomena (elemental psychology) to a holistic view, detailing what he termed adspective psychology and its method. I then turn to Rubin’s embrace of certain experimental observations made by Berkeley and, in particular, by Hume concerning the minima visibilia. The second part of the paper deals with Tranekjær Rasmussen’s interpretation of Berkeley’s work, and in particular of his immaterialism, his notion of God, and his critique of abstract ideas.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
20世纪丹麦实验心理学对乔治·伯克利哲学的回应:埃德加·鲁宾和埃德加·特拉内克·拉斯穆森
本文的目的是探讨乔治伯克利在20世纪丹麦心理学和哲学的一个特定角落的接受。与哲学家(如Peter Zinkernagel和David Favrholdt)不同,丹麦实验心理学家(包括Edgar Rubin和Edgar tranekj - ekr Rasmussen)对伯克利和休谟的方法论和实验观察给予了高度赞赏。本文主要关注这些心理学家对伯克利思想的兴趣。我将首先介绍鲁宾从对心理现象(元素心理学)的马赛克式理解到整体观点的路径,详细介绍他所谓的相应心理学及其方法。然后,我转向鲁宾对伯克利,特别是休谟关于最小可见性的某些实验观察的接受。论文的第二部分讨论了特拉内克·拉斯穆森对伯克利著作的解读,特别是他的非唯物主义、他的上帝观念以及他对抽象观念的批判。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Science in a World of Politics Strong Scientific Meritocratism: Standpoint Epistemology as a Middle Ground in the Debate over Personal Merit in Science Should Liberal Communities Respect Bad Believers? On Empirical Disagreement over Climate Change and Public Reason Understanding Meaning through Human Evolution The Radical Demand in Løgstrup’s Ethics, written by Robert Stern
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1