At least until recently, psychology was just a synonym for philosophy - the exploration of the mind. Precursors in the field include everyone from Alcmaeon, Protagoras, Socrates, Plato and Aristotle, to Descartes, Spinoza, the empiricists like Hobbes, Locke and Hume, German nativists like Leibniz and Kant, and of course Nietzsche.
Modern psychology arguably begins with Wilhelm Wundt’s study on ‘the duration of apperception’ in 1879, though others might argue Weber’s work in the 1830’s or Helmholtz’s measurement of nerve transmission speeds in 1850 are also suitible beginnings. The bottom line is that psychology ceases to be philosophy when repeatable, falsifiable laboratory work replaces pure introspection.
I suppose my response was meant to point out modern psychology is technically a science - and that any methodology thereby is essentially labwork and experiements, etc. Being more philosophically inclined, my psychologists are more philosophers in essence (James, Nietzsche, Freud, Jung, the behaviorists, Watson, Hull, Skinner) and their method is more one of rigorous introspection and general observation than dry ‘science’.
Then you are saying the best psychologist are ones that are philosophers, and not actual self-proclaim psychologist themselves. And there are no best methods or studies as long as they work.
Dan02 quote - Who is the best psychologist throughout time? What method?
I nominate Jesus as the best because his message (to put it bluntly) was " **** the world".
No kidding, its a central theme of Christianity to reject the world and not get bogged down in it despite parents, teachers and society all trying to drag us in from childhood.
Rejecting all that krap works for me, I feel bleddy fantastic
(As this is the philo board i’ll spare you a truckload of bible quotes to back myself up unless you twist my arm…)
Not necessarily. I think asking ‘who’s the best psychologist?’ is like asking ‘who’s the best scientist?’; that’s more to my point - where, at least in modern psychology, it’s less about ‘best’ as it is about tangible, objective contribution in the scientific sense. My point (and it’s just my point, that’s why I phrase it that way) is that, personally, I tend to like psychology that’s hypothetical-theoretical-philosophical in nature. I just think it’s more intellectually stimulating; by no means is this an objective perspective.
I nominate Jesus as the best because his message (to put it bluntly) was " **** the world".
No kidding, its a central theme of Christianity to reject the world and not get bogged down in it despite parents, teachers and society all trying to drag us in from childhood.
Rejecting all that krap works for me, I feel bleddy fantastic
(As this is the philo board i’ll spare you a truckload of bible quotes to back myself up unless you twist my arm…)
[/quote]
So jesus was a psychologist, what theraphy did he used for his patients?
Alright, I believe you. But I do not believe you are the best throughout history though, but a good one at least.
Well I think, if that were true, scientists does not need to have a psychology degree, in order to be a psychologist in order to work in that particular field. That would be nice.
You guyz were great participating, but my interest for this thread is starting to decease.
This request might be in vain given you’ve said your ‘interest for this thread is starting to decease’, but would you mind rephrasing this so it makes sense?
Dan02 quote - So jesus was a psychologist, what theraphy did he used for his patients?
Like i said, his therapeutic advice was “chill, don’t worry bout nothin”, what better advice is there than that?
Hey, I see “Zeppelin” is on BBC2 TV in a few minutes, - “Michael York plays a spy behind German lines in WW1”
Hmm sounds good, i’ll be watching that for sure
I think you make a very important point here. Psychologists fail to fully examine the external world when making their judgments, this is where philosophers p*ss all over them in regards to psycho-analysis. The psyche is not an entity unto itself, it is constantly ineracting with the external world.
One of my previous philosophy lectures said that if you go to see a psychologist you’ll definitely come out with some disorder. It’s like seeing an optometrist, you go inwithout glasses, and come out with them.
Interesting.
But what about Schopenhauer? I know he wasn’t a psychologist, but he basically got the ball rolling in regards to attempting to examine the essence of the psyche.