Physis; rivista internazionale di storia della scienza最新文献

Despite some negative comments expressed by E. du Bois-Reymond on W. Wundt's experimental skills, the latter provided accurate descriptions of the laboratory instruments just in his first works. But he paid particular attention to graphic recording, whose history was most likely reconstructed by him probably for the first time. Its significance lay in the fact that it was applied in every psychology laboratory: without it, mental phenomena could not be measured. Starting from such a history, the aim of this essay is to trace the paths that have led to the introduction of graphic recording into the sciences. Commonly connected with the invention of C. Ludwig's kymograph in 1846, graphic recording has nevertheless a much more extensive background.

During the last thirty years of the nineteenth century in France, a psychology calling itself "positive," "experimental," or "physiological" was developing in opposition to the official philosophy, eclectic spiritualism. Its bases were set forth by Hippolyte Taine and Théodule Ribot, who popularised foreign models among the academic and scientific public, opposing spiritualism on the one hand, and Auguste Comte's positivism on the other. At the end of the century, Pierre Janet put into practice Ribot's programme for psychology, while differentiating himself from Ribot on the question of the relationship between psychology and physiology. Meanwhile, Alfred Binet, influenced by Taine in the first part of his work, went on to develop "individual psychology," and Gabriel Tarde tried to establish "interpsychology," which never managed to become recognised as a discipline in its own right. We intend to reposition these "scientific" psychologists and their works in that intellectual, institutional, and political context existing in late-nineteenth-century France. We aim to show that "scientific" psychology was able to find its place in that context only within philosophy, by means of a strategy of co-existing insertion and differentiation. If a new discipline did emerge, it was only after compromise, and with limited institutionalisation.

The development of psychological science in Spain, as in other countries, was closely associated with the creation of institutions that sheltered and promoted its activities. Contrary to the case of German psychology, however, whose origins have been usefully epitomized by the foundation of Wundt's laboratory in Leipzig, no single institutional event can similarly be properly said to mark the beginning of Spanish scientific psychology. The institutionalization of modern psychology in Spain was instead a long, eventful process, often hindered by political uneasiness, difficult social conditions, and ideological confrontation. In this paper, the institutionalizing process of Spanish scientific psychology will be dealt with, from the beginning of the Restoration period in the last quarter of the nineteenth century, to the early decades of the twentieth century. Three crucial stages will be distinguished. Firstly, the reception of psychological ideas through "protopsychological"--or, at least, not specifically psychological--institutions. Secondly, the attempt at institutionalizing psychological training at the university through the creation of a Chair of Experimental Psychology at the University of Madrid in 1900. Thirdly, the expansion of psychology as an applied science through numerous institutions specifically devised to deal with practical problems of a basically educational and industrial nature. The Civil War prevented the final consolidation of this process, which only years later, in the second half of the twentieth century, could be reinitiated and completed.

The first laboratories of psychology established in Brazil were organized in the early twentieth century by professionals trained in medical schools or in education. These laboratories, linked to mental health hospitals or to normal schools, followed guidelines suggested by Edouard Claparède, from the Laboratory of Psychology of the University of Geneva, and by Alfred Binet, from the Laboratory of Psychology of the University of Paris (Sorbonne). Besides replicating experimental studies done in Europe, their purpose was to study the psychological characteristics of the population attended by the mental health or educational systems. The themes explored by the researchers were the comparison of psychological processes in normal and mentally troubled individuals, or the study of the mental development of school-age children. The meaning of the word "laboratory" became associated with applied psychology, and with the adaptation to the Brazilian population of mental tests elaborated in other countries (mainly in France). Around the 1940s and 1950s, with the establishment of the teaching of psychology in higher learning institutions, research in the area expanded. Two authors are mainly responsible for this expansion: Lourenço Filho (1897-1970), and Helena Antipoff (1892-1974). Their work, still inspired by Claparède and Binet, contributed to the development of important lines of research in psychology in Brazil, with a lasting influence on subsequent generations of psychologists. From the 1960s onwards, with the regulation of the profession of psychologist, formal university programs increased strongly, and, in the 1980s and 1990s, a comprehensive system of graduate programs in psychology was established, contributing to the professionalization of research in the field.

Between 1889 and 1892, Binet published two remarkable essays, On Double Consciousness and Les alterations de la personnalité, which marked the end of a period of researches and interests closely linked to the doctrines on hypnosis and hysteria elaborated by the Ecole de la Salpêtrière. Later on, Binet was to abandon the utilization of hypnosis as a technique of experimentation, after he realized that the suggestibility of the "subjects" of these experiences had led to major experimental mistakes. However, during the years of his work at the Salpêtrière, he elaborated the notion of "double consciousness," which can be considered an alternative both to Ribot's idea of dissociation and to Janet's idea of disaggregation. The notion of double consciousness reveals both the originality of Binet's psychology--which was elaborated at the end of the nineteenth century--and its verifiable link to twentieth-century psychology. Unlike Janet, in fact, Binet did not support a theory of psychological deficiency or "misery," or of the retraction of the sphere of consciousness, which a normal capacity for psychological synthesis would oppose. On the contrary, Binet's psychology resulted in a theory stating that the duality of consciousness works in a perfect and autonomous way within the individual and, thanks to hypnosis, can be investigated in a laboratory.

The historiography of psychology has highlighted how in Italy experts both from the field of philosophy and above all from that of medicine have contributed to the foundation of scientific psychology. The "project of experimental psychology" took shape in the second half of the nineteenth century, thanks especially to the work of physiologists, neurophysiologists, neurohistologists, psychiatrists, and anthropologists, such as Tamburini, Seppilli, Luciani, Golgi, Buccola, Ferrari, Morselli, Mosso, Kiesow, etc. These experts in their various fields were all involved in the attempt to redefine psychology as a natural science on a par with the other scientific disciplines and, therefore, to identify and delimit its proper object of study, while consequently developing its relative "quantitative" methods with reference to those of psychophysics, psychophysiology, and psycochronometry. This attempt developed particularly in Reggio Emilia and in Turin. In the San Lazzaro Mental Hospital of Reggio Emilia directed by Augusto Tamburini, there was an important cultural movement regarding research and training, which culminated in Gabriele Buccola's systematic experimental research on reaction times. In Turin, instead, the presence of the psychiatrist Enrico Morselli and the physiologist Angelo Mosso favoured the development of a Wundtian-style experimental psychology. The type of investigations conducted in these research centres reflects the interests of their authors, but it also reveals their common objective of founding a new psychological discipline that would have "scientific" characteristics.

The pattern of the institutionalisation of psychology in Russia was as complex as in other countries. The institutionalisation was more than a single event or even a series of events: it was a manifold process that involved various actors, groups, and political parties, and took at least several decades. Psychology was taught within the subject of philosophy, but as a separate course, at high schools, from the early nineteenth century. When, in mid-century, philosophy was banned from universities for political reasons, logic and psychology still remained in the curriculum. Psychology became a contested area in the 1860s, with the rise of the radical movement that accompanied the abolition of serfdom and other reforms. The young radicals, or nihilists, favoured positive science and gave clear preference to physiology; at medical schools, psychology gradually became part of physiology and psychiatry teaching. Psychiatric clinics provided a venue for the first psychological experiments; the first courses in experimental psychology were also taught to psychiatry students. At the turn of the century, humanities departments joined in by opening laboratories and adding courses in experimental psychology to the philosophical psychology traditionally taught. Yet by 1917, the year when the monarchy ended in Russia, only two universities, in Moscow and Odessa, had succeeded in founding laboratories. The institutionalisation of psychology on a mass scale followed the Bolshevik revolution in Russia. The new communist regime facilitated the country's modernisation, and psychology became one of its instruments.

Studies of the history of Italian psychology have thoroughly and somewhat systematically analysed the particular characteristics and principal themes that distinguished this discipline in the period between the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. With regard to the affirmation of a "scientific" psychology in Italy, these studies have emphasized the importance of the research conducted at the University of Florence in the Laboratory of Experimental Psychology, founded in 1903 by Francesco De Sarlo. The results of the activity carried out in this laboratory are collected in the two volumes of Ricerche di Psicologia, published in 1905 and 1907. An analysis of these works clarifies the way in which De Sarlo and his collaborators intervened directly in the experimental activity. Various types of experimentation were conducted in the laboratory, such as those on the measurement of sensations and perceptions. The psychologists made use of adequate instruments, which they themselves often prepared or modified, without however neglecting an attentive survey of the states of consciousness. On the basis of a methodological approach that reconciles the accuracy of the measurements with the verification of the internal dimensions of the mental processes of the subjects undergoing the experimentation, the research carried out in the Florence Laboratory contributes to characterising, in an original way, the foundation of "scientific" psychology in Italy. In particular, by means of the publication of the results of this laboratory's research activity, Italian psychology acquired a new impulse to assert itself as an autonomous science and to promote its accreditation on an institutional level.

In 1877, only about three Americans knew anything of the new psychology then emerging in central Europe. But only 40 years later, this new psychology and its practitioners played a major role in the U.S. effort during the Great War. This article traces the origins and early evolution of this new science in the United States. It opens with a review of the American social, cultural and intellectual setting ca. 1880. It thus addresses such forces: as demographic, industrial, and religious change; the declining status of the long-influential Scottish Common-Sense Realist philosophy; the continuing impact of Baconian thought, of phrenology, and of spiritualism; the growing influence of Comtean and evolutionary ideas; and the rise of American universities. It then contrasts aspects of this American milieu with those of Germany that initially promoted the new science and, as a further comparison, it briefly sketches the contemporaneous status of psychology in Britain. Returning to the U.S., this article next outlines the state of American psychology ca. 1895, and argues that many of its characteristics derived from those of the earlier American setting. This article closes by taking psychology as an exemplar of contrasting American and German academic concerns throughout the 19th century and, finally, with a "speculative conclusion" about the overall development of American psychology.

The Scientific Psychology that was founded by Wilhelm Wundt appeared in China in the late nineteenth century. The scholars translated the name of psychology into Chinese as Xin-Li-Xue, for which the meaning of the words looks like "heartology," i.e., "the study of the heart." In Chinese, the same core structure related to "heart" (Xin) is found in most of the terms of psychology, such as emotion, thinking, will, forgetting, and memory. By translating Xin as "heart" instead of "mind," we maintain an embodied approach to understanding the "principles of the heart." Through a historical approach to the influence of Western psychology, a cultural analysis of the meaning of the term psychology in Chinese, and a focus on the meeting of Eastern and Western psychology, we can witness the significance of psychology in the Chinese language and cultural context. I will use three parts to present psychology in the Chinese cultural context: the origins of Chinese psychology, from a historical approach; the meaning of "psychology" in Chinese, using a cultural analysis; and the meeting of Eastern and Western psychology, focusing on the development and future.