首页 > 最新文献

History & philosophy of psychology最新文献

英文 中文
Public psychology and the Cold War brainwashing scare. 公众心理学和冷战洗脑恐慌。
Pub Date : 2020-01-01
Charlie Williams

In 1950, a new word 'brainwashing' entered the English language. Though its meaning was always ambiguous and continuously evolving, it captured various concerns about the future uses of psychology in warfare and domestic life and the potential for new technologies to control and manipulate human minds. Recent scholarship on what historians have called the 'Cold War brainwashing scare' has tended to treat brainwashing as a Cold War paranoia or fantasy that not only was never to be, but was never really supported by scientific research. Drawing on recent scholarship and my own research, this paper examines some of the interactions between experts and popular discourses on brainwashing. For many experts, the Cold War brainwashing scare offered an opportunity to engage the public with contemporary psychological theory and research. But it was by no means a discussion over which they had complete control. It will be argued that the popular debate about brainwashing was not only a question of dealing with scientific 'facts', but existed in a more diverse imaginary concerned as much with present realities, as it was with future possibilities. Much in the same way that stories about artificial intelligence are reported today, discussions of techniques of brainwashing were often accompanied by speculation both wild and grounded about how new technology may be used in the future and by whom. This paper covers three examples: Korean War military psychiatrists, the popular theories of William Sargant and the field of experimental research known broadly as sensory deprivation. It concludes with some observations about current concerns about psychological manipulation in the digital age and the role psychology expertise plays in navigating these concerns.

1950年,一个新词“洗脑”进入了英语语言。尽管它的含义总是模棱两可且不断演变,但它反映了人们对未来心理学在战争和家庭生活中的应用以及新技术控制和操纵人类思想的可能性的各种担忧。最近关于历史学家所谓的“冷战洗脑恐慌”的学术研究倾向于将洗脑视为冷战时期的偏执或幻想,这不仅从未发生过,而且从未得到科学研究的真正支持。根据最近的学术研究和我自己的研究,本文考察了专家和关于洗脑的流行话语之间的一些互动。对许多专家来说,冷战时期的洗脑恐慌为公众提供了一个接触当代心理学理论和研究的机会。但这绝不是一场他们完全掌控的讨论。我们会认为,关于洗脑的流行辩论不仅是一个处理科学"事实"的问题,而且存在于一个更多样化的想象中,既涉及当前的现实,也涉及未来的可能性。就像今天关于人工智能的报道一样,关于洗脑技术的讨论往往伴随着对未来新技术将如何使用以及由谁使用的猜测,这些猜测既疯狂又有根据。本文涵盖了三个例子:朝鲜战争的军事精神病学家,威廉·萨金特的流行理论和被广泛称为感觉剥夺的实验研究领域。它总结了一些关于当前数字时代对心理操纵的关注以及心理学专业知识在引导这些关注方面所起的作用的观察。
{"title":"Public psychology and the Cold War brainwashing scare.","authors":"Charlie Williams","doi":"","DOIUrl":"","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In 1950, a new word 'brainwashing' entered the English language. Though its meaning was always ambiguous and continuously evolving, it captured various concerns about the future uses of psychology in warfare and domestic life and the potential for new technologies to control and manipulate human minds. Recent scholarship on what historians have called the 'Cold War brainwashing scare' has tended to treat brainwashing as a Cold War paranoia or fantasy that not only was never to be, but was never really supported by scientific research. Drawing on recent scholarship and my own research, this paper examines some of the interactions between experts and popular discourses on brainwashing. For many experts, the Cold War brainwashing scare offered an opportunity to engage the public with contemporary psychological theory and research. But it was by no means a discussion over which they had complete control. It will be argued that the popular debate about brainwashing was not only a question of dealing with scientific 'facts', but existed in a more diverse imaginary concerned as much with present realities, as it was with future possibilities. Much in the same way that stories about artificial intelligence are reported today, discussions of techniques of brainwashing were often accompanied by speculation both wild and grounded about how new technology may be used in the future and by whom. This paper covers three examples: Korean War military psychiatrists, the popular theories of William Sargant and the field of experimental research known broadly as sensory deprivation. It concludes with some observations about current concerns about psychological manipulation in the digital age and the role psychology expertise plays in navigating these concerns.</p>","PeriodicalId":87267,"journal":{"name":"History & philosophy of psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7116730/pdf/EMS114217.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"25367709","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Public psychology and the Cold War brainwashing scare. 公众心理学和冷战洗脑恐慌。
Pub Date : 2020-01-01 DOI: 10.53841/bpshpp.2020.21.1.21
Charlie Williams
In 1950, a new word 'brainwashing' entered the English language. Though its meaning was always ambiguous and continuously evolving, it captured various concerns about the future uses of psychology in warfare and domestic life and the potential for new technologies to control and manipulate human minds. Recent scholarship on what historians have called the 'Cold War brainwashing scare' has tended to treat brainwashing as a Cold War paranoia or fantasy that not only was never to be, but was never really supported by scientific research. Drawing on recent scholarship and my own research, this paper examines some of the interactions between experts and popular discourses on brainwashing. For many experts, the Cold War brainwashing scare offered an opportunity to engage the public with contemporary psychological theory and research. But it was by no means a discussion over which they had complete control. It will be argued that the popular debate about brainwashing was not only a question of dealing with scientific 'facts', but existed in a more diverse imaginary concerned as much with present realities, as it was with future possibilities. Much in the same way that stories about artificial intelligence are reported today, discussions of techniques of brainwashing were often accompanied by speculation both wild and grounded about how new technology may be used in the future and by whom. This paper covers three examples: Korean War military psychiatrists, the popular theories of William Sargant and the field of experimental research known broadly as sensory deprivation. It concludes with some observations about current concerns about psychological manipulation in the digital age and the role psychology expertise plays in navigating these concerns.
1950年,一个新词“洗脑”进入了英语语言。尽管它的含义总是模棱两可且不断演变,但它反映了人们对未来心理学在战争和家庭生活中的应用以及新技术控制和操纵人类思想的可能性的各种担忧。最近关于历史学家所谓的“冷战洗脑恐慌”的学术研究倾向于将洗脑视为冷战时期的偏执或幻想,这不仅从未发生过,而且从未得到科学研究的真正支持。根据最近的学术研究和我自己的研究,本文考察了专家和关于洗脑的流行话语之间的一些互动。对许多专家来说,冷战时期的洗脑恐慌为公众提供了一个接触当代心理学理论和研究的机会。但这绝不是一场他们完全掌控的讨论。我们会认为,关于洗脑的流行辩论不仅是一个处理科学"事实"的问题,而且存在于一个更多样化的想象中,既涉及当前的现实,也涉及未来的可能性。就像今天关于人工智能的报道一样,关于洗脑技术的讨论往往伴随着对未来新技术将如何使用以及由谁使用的猜测,这些猜测既疯狂又有根据。本文涵盖了三个例子:朝鲜战争的军事精神病学家,威廉·萨金特的流行理论和被广泛称为感觉剥夺的实验研究领域。它总结了一些关于当前数字时代对心理操纵的关注以及心理学专业知识在引导这些关注方面所起的作用的观察。
{"title":"Public psychology and the Cold War brainwashing scare.","authors":"Charlie Williams","doi":"10.53841/bpshpp.2020.21.1.21","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.53841/bpshpp.2020.21.1.21","url":null,"abstract":"In 1950, a new word 'brainwashing' entered the English language. Though its meaning was always ambiguous and continuously evolving, it captured various concerns about the future uses of psychology in warfare and domestic life and the potential for new technologies to control and manipulate human minds. Recent scholarship on what historians have called the 'Cold War brainwashing scare' has tended to treat brainwashing as a Cold War paranoia or fantasy that not only was never to be, but was never really supported by scientific research. Drawing on recent scholarship and my own research, this paper examines some of the interactions between experts and popular discourses on brainwashing. For many experts, the Cold War brainwashing scare offered an opportunity to engage the public with contemporary psychological theory and research. But it was by no means a discussion over which they had complete control. It will be argued that the popular debate about brainwashing was not only a question of dealing with scientific 'facts', but existed in a more diverse imaginary concerned as much with present realities, as it was with future possibilities. Much in the same way that stories about artificial intelligence are reported today, discussions of techniques of brainwashing were often accompanied by speculation both wild and grounded about how new technology may be used in the future and by whom. This paper covers three examples: Korean War military psychiatrists, the popular theories of William Sargant and the field of experimental research known broadly as sensory deprivation. It concludes with some observations about current concerns about psychological manipulation in the digital age and the role psychology expertise plays in navigating these concerns.","PeriodicalId":87267,"journal":{"name":"History & philosophy of psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77677030","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
期刊
History & philosophy of psychology
全部 Acc. Chem. Res. ACS Applied Bio Materials ACS Appl. Electron. Mater. ACS Appl. Energy Mater. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces ACS Appl. Nano Mater. ACS Appl. Polym. Mater. ACS BIOMATER-SCI ENG ACS Catal. ACS Cent. Sci. ACS Chem. Biol. ACS Chemical Health & Safety ACS Chem. Neurosci. ACS Comb. Sci. ACS Earth Space Chem. ACS Energy Lett. ACS Infect. Dis. ACS Macro Lett. ACS Mater. Lett. ACS Med. Chem. Lett. ACS Nano ACS Omega ACS Photonics ACS Sens. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. ACS Synth. Biol. Anal. Chem. BIOCHEMISTRY-US Bioconjugate Chem. BIOMACROMOLECULES Chem. Res. Toxicol. Chem. Rev. Chem. Mater. CRYST GROWTH DES ENERG FUEL Environ. Sci. Technol. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. Eur. J. Inorg. Chem. IND ENG CHEM RES Inorg. Chem. J. Agric. Food. Chem. J. Chem. Eng. Data J. Chem. Educ. J. Chem. Inf. Model. J. Chem. Theory Comput. J. Med. Chem. J. Nat. Prod. J PROTEOME RES J. Am. Chem. Soc. LANGMUIR MACROMOLECULES Mol. Pharmaceutics Nano Lett. Org. Lett. ORG PROCESS RES DEV ORGANOMETALLICS J. Org. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. A J. Phys. Chem. B J. Phys. Chem. C J. Phys. Chem. Lett. Analyst Anal. Methods Biomater. Sci. Catal. Sci. Technol. Chem. Commun. Chem. Soc. Rev. CHEM EDUC RES PRACT CRYSTENGCOMM Dalton Trans. Energy Environ. Sci. ENVIRON SCI-NANO ENVIRON SCI-PROC IMP ENVIRON SCI-WAT RES Faraday Discuss. Food Funct. Green Chem. Inorg. Chem. Front. Integr. Biol. J. Anal. At. Spectrom. J. Mater. Chem. A J. Mater. Chem. B J. Mater. Chem. C Lab Chip Mater. Chem. Front. Mater. Horiz. MEDCHEMCOMM Metallomics Mol. Biosyst. Mol. Syst. Des. Eng. Nanoscale Nanoscale Horiz. Nat. Prod. Rep. New J. Chem. Org. Biomol. Chem. Org. Chem. Front. PHOTOCH PHOTOBIO SCI PCCP Polym. Chem.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
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
×
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
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