How the Views and Approach of Socrates Might Be Relevant to Psychology Today - Assignment Example

TUTORIAL QUESTIONS 1. Discuss how the views and approach of Socrates might be relevant to psychology today Socrates are among famous individuals in the classical era who is among scholars and movements that sought to explore issues based on morality within three main areas namely ontological inquiry into what exists, seeking to establish the nature of reality, epistemological inquiry into the what and how people know and finally, ethical and practical inquiry. The three areas started from ontological inquiries to epistemological inquiry to finally ethical questions and practical guides to living as noted in the lecture 2, p.1. Centrality of the method of critical inquiries in understanding the cause and nature of psychology is the most fundamental feature of science. A lot of individuals are curious in modern day on the method of science with some indicating experimentation, theory –deductive method and observation and while others indicating that the method of science is every of these and that there is no one scientific method. Be it as it may, a significant underlying core factor to all scientific methods is critical inquiry. According to the Lecture 2, p. 4, critical inquiry is defined as “the attempt to investigate things carefully and systematically, both conceptually and empirically, using methods open to others to imitate and criticize, and always being aware that, because those methods are liable to error, the inquiry must use the best available error-detection mechanisms.” Critical questioning is the direct reverse of dogma as it encourages challenges and criticisms as component of its error-recognition method. Among classical scholars who heavily used and advocated critical inquiry was Socrates. Socrates compelled individuals to analyze and inquire their perceptions and he advanced aporia, which is a status of enlightened ignorance. Socrates challenged the educational concept as just instruction and indoctrination and substituted it with the concept of education as opening the mind to critical inquiry. The use of critical inquiry advocated by Socrates are very relevant in modern environment although they generate confronting issues and difficulty for the education instructors since it advocates for challenging the authority by students which easily exposes the individual errors of the teachers. Due to the failure to understand Socrates, those in power indicted Socrates for claims of corrupting the Athens youths since he encouraged them to challenge decisions made by those in positions of power and authority. Socrates incorporated critical inquiry the basis of scientific attitude with the sanction to -know thyself. According to Lecture 2, p. 4, in incorporating the origins of scientific approach with the beginning of psychology as a discipline of psychotherapy has generated into the use of critical analysis and evidence –based practice in major fields such in education sector and in the health sector. Where teachers are advised to help their students know how to critically analyze content and in so doing helping them assess the validity, reliability, relevance and credibility of material and information content and clinical and nursing personnel are routinely taught and obligated to base their diagnosis, treatment and management of diseases on evidence-based practice respectively. The views of Socrates that people should be critical of their actions, thoughts and conduct ensures that people are in tune with what they do and think, hence self control as indicated by Background to psychology, p.48. More importantly his critical approach to issues allows for critical analyses and the use of evidence –based practice which ensures that information relied on is not only factual and relevant but also credible and acceptable across the board. Background to psychology, p.48 suggests that Socrates helped define the nature and the meaning of abstracts human concepts like justice and beauty. As noted in Lecture 2, p. 5 & 6, Socrates insisted on people examining their life to make it worth living. Socrates’ probing technique of inquiry compels people to confront and analyze their assumptions and attitudes which enhance their ability to acquire self knowledge. The critical approach supported and advanced by Socrates, helps alters the belief as and assumptions of people about their cognitions which is applicable in modern day-cognitive behavioral therapies. 2. What is meant by “Ockham’s razor”, and how do Ockham’s views illustrate it? Do you believe it is a principle which psychology should follow today? Ockham’s razor is a principle that was intensely promoted by William of Ockham, a philosopher who argued that there are no scientific and empirical basis for believing in an immaterial, immortal soul when responding to the radical distinction between faith and reason as indicated by Lecture 3, p.2. As stated by the lecture, William of Ockham believed that “As far as reason or philosophy goes, the mind may be a perishable entity dependent on the body. It is only from faith that knowledge of the immortal soul comes. This separation of faith and reason greatly weakened theology and metaphysics, but it helped bring science into being.” The Ockham ‘s razor also referred to as the law of economy or the law of parsimony is described as a principle that promotes the use of simplest explanations on methodological basis. The principle advices people to apply theories that are minimally efficient so long as they are able to function the same with less. The principle suggests that plurality must be conceived without necessity and that an entity should not be multiplied beyond need. The principle is one which is critical and significantly so for modern psychology in modern day since it helps psychologists and therapies to always ensure they do not do with more what can be done with fewer which reduces complexities. 3. Briefly describe one characteristic of the Medieval world view, and discuss the ways in which things are similar and/or different today. Among the characteristics of the medieval world view is the pull and push force between faith and reason. The medieval world view was characterized by an all-encompassing, overarching influence of the Christian religion where faith is perceived as a given over which people sought to comprehend the world and the nature of human beings. During this era, the questions about God and the scriptural writings were deemed the queen of sciences as quipped by lecture, 3, p. 1, where philosophy was perceived as the servant of faith. Medial world view was greatly religious and facilitated a symbolic way of thinking. Primarily, medieval philosophers and scholars encountered great tension between religion and philosophy which culminated in tension in regards to faith and reason, which were primarily ignited by faith seeking understanding (lecture, 3, p. 1). According to lecture, (3, p. 1), “The crucial question tackled was not whether Christianity and philosophy were compatible, but whether Christianity and Aristotelian philosophy were compatible.” The tension between faith and reason in medieval world view saw many philosophers and theologians developing varied means of seeking to cope with the tension such St. Thomas Aquinas, William of Ockham and the Arabic commentator Ibn Rushd among others. In modern day, the situation still remains significantly the same with population being divided in the middle in regards to the conflict between religion and philosophy and faith and reason in regards to the creation of the universe and existence of matter. 4. How was the “clockwork” conception of the universe supposedly a challenge to Aristotelian teleology? Which of the two views do you find most convincing? Aristotle’s view of empiricism as discussed by the lecture 2, p. 2 suggests that knowledge is derived from the senses. More specifically, the views by Aristotle took the paths of direct realism that suggests that senses provide people with direct knowledge of whatever they sense. The philosopher is also linked to the -isms of psychology such as determinism, naturalism and realism as highlighted in lecture 2, p.1, which are common in the scientific approach adopted in modern psychology. The clockwork conception of the universe as established and promoted by Descartes supported the mechanical philosophy where there was no innate purpose and matter was considered purposeless, machine-like and blind. This contrasted Aristotelian teleology that suggested purposiveness and goal directedness of matter (lecture 4, p. 2). Descartes views were embraced over Aristotle’s view which dug a hole for philosophy and psychology as evidenced today as suggested by Leahey in (lecture 4, p. 2). Clock work conception of the universe allowed for reductionism of mental functions to mechanical processes which was divergent. I find Aristotle’s views more convincing since his direct realism view could not have culminated the problems generated by Descartes views such as solipsism 5. Briefly describe what is meant by “mind-body interactionism”? Is there any problem with the Cartesian version of this position? Among problems countering the Cartesian version is the challenge of mind-body interactions which relates to the link between the mind and the body when perceiving. According to Cartesian version, the mind and body are in two different realms namely the mental and the physical realms that are fully distinct and have nothing in common as discussed by (Lecture 4, p.3). According to Descartes, the mental real entails thinking matter and is free while the physical realm entails extended matter, which is determined, that is, it is subject to causality. While perceiving using the Cartesian version, the object of interest is seen or perceived is physical and the events from the said object to the eyes and finally to the bran are physical and causal meaning they are determined. Be it as it may, the final product is a mental event in one’s mind. There is a problem with such a view of mind and body interaction since either a physical or a mental link generates a problem which generates a dualist dilemma where when dualism is complete, the interaction is unachievable and when interaction is not abler to occur then, there can never be any dualism (Lecture 4, p.3). When one starts with a drastic disconnect of the physical with the mental and with a perspective that they are the only accessible to their ideas that are representations of the universe as proposed by Cartesian version, this leads to solipsism. 6. Explain and discuss Leahey’s (2004) claim that “Descartes dug a hole” for psychology (p. 141). Psychology is defined as the inquiry into human nature. Issues in the history and philosophy of psychology are echoes or alterations of responses to or reaction against Greeks way of thinking and practice. Questions of what and how people know, that is, epistemological questions, generates into rationalism and empiricism where the former suggests that the senses offers people illusions and uncertainty and that true knowledge is from inherent reasoning and not from the senses. In regards to the latter, knowledge is generated through the senses which is supported by philosophers such as Aristotle. From empiricist ideology, direct and indirect knowledge occurs where in the latter, senses offers direct knowledge of what one senses referred to as direct realism and in the former, senses offer indirect knowledge with senses giving only representations of what one directly perceives – an approach referred to as representationism. The disparity between representationism and direct realism are fundamental in influencing the direction psychology has taken today in modern world. According to Leahey, (2000, p. 87), following the scientific revolution, realism was thrown out in preference of representational theories of perception which suggests that consciousness is fundamentally alienated from the world which people perceive not things but representations of concepts, viewpoints and consciousness. The author notes that the shift from realism to representationism, which is the most preferred view in modern cognitive psychology, established psychology but in so doing, generated huge challenges for philosophy. Primarily, the shift from realism to representationism did actually establish psychology in relation to the inner world of ideas referred to as the Ways of Ideas by Leahey but in the process initiating problems for philosophy and psychology, which marks the start of Leahey’s view that Descartes "dug a hole" for psychology. To date, psychology is yet to recover from the said problems and has been on a struggle to escape from the dug hole. Descartes is believed to be the founder of modern psychology. His concept about the mind and consciousness and Descartes’ conception of the body as a machine developed the structure in which psychologists have functioned and operated for centuries on end as noted by Leahey, 2004, p. 130. The author suggest that the new direction prompted by Descartes was critical as it established the idea of consciousness which is the definition of psychology and beginning of deep-set challenges of which psychology struggles with in modern day as argued by Leahey, (2004, p. 135). By supporting the new framework of the body as a machine and the concept of clock work world, Leahey argues out that there lacked innate purpose particularly when Aristotle’s realism which generated purpose and goal-directness of matter was abandoned for an approach. Where matter was more mechanical, aimless and blind which culminated to reductionism which led to struggles to expel occult powers and magic from matter (Leahey, 2004, p. 133). The author is categorical in mentioning that Descartes initiated reduction of psychological functions to mechanical procedures Leahey, (2004, p. 133). Descartes advanced the notion of Cartesian dualism where two radically varied matters exists which formed the basis of his doubts apart from his thinking where consciousness is self-transparent as described by the Background to Psychology, p.138. Descartes opted to take the path of representationism as earlier analyzed where the physical world is quantitative entailing tiny particles that act as senses, then the brain and finally the pineal gland in a purely mental but conscious process. According to Background to Psychology, p.139, the hole dug by Descartes includes the difficulty with dualism in relation to interaction between body and mind. Dualism generated impossibility of science as psychology and the generation of the skeptical crises as supported by Lecture 4, p.5. Leahey, (2004, p. 133) states that “By reducing mind to a point; by making experience a mysterious, subjective, thing called consciousness; by assuming there is a point in the brain where experience happens; and by creating the problem of other minds and the issue of interaction, it appears that Descartes dug a hole from which psychology is only now escaping.” The main challenge of representationism is solipsism which indicates that individuals exist alone. 7. Briefly explain what Leahey refers to as an “irony of the Scientific Revolution.” How did Berkeley answer the "skeptical question"? Do you think his answer is acceptable? The seventeenth Scientific Revolution changed the perception of the universe. Rather than the animated or spirit filled universe that characterized the medieval world view, the universe was now mechanical in nature which initiated a universe that was primarily a huge machine that was independent of human feelings and needs (Leahey 2004, p. 120). The irony of the scientific revolution was that while it symbolized a huge success of human reason, it however, cast doubt on the very likelihood of human knowledge. According to Berkeley, Cartesian-Lockean views of existence of real objects which generate perception was unrealistic since if people only know ideas, then it would be correct to be critical of physical/ non-mental reality meaning that people have no right to divide primary and secondary properties as proposed by John Locke. Berkeley suggests that both primary and secondary properties of ideas be termed as properties of ideas. Conclusively, Berkely notes that reality which in inclusive of both primary and secondary properties is mental, which forms the basis of his idealism view. In answer to the skeptical question, Berkeley indicates that to exist is to be perceived. He adds “…For as to what is said about the absolute existence of unthinking things without any relation to their being perceived, that seems perfectly unintelligible. Their esse is percipi, nor is it possible that they should have any existence, out of minds or thinking things which perceive them…” as highlighted in Lecture 4, p.1. I particularly think his answer to the skeptical question is acceptable. 8. How was common sense reasserted in Thomas Reid’s views, and in what way was this a return to Aristotle? Although Thomas Reid did not object to empirical questioning into the function and processes of the human mind, he believed philosophy was headed the wrong path with establishment of Cartesian theatre and the Way of ideas as discussed in the Background to Psychology, p. 162. According to Cartesian –Lockean views, the mind is not familiar with objects but only with the representation of ideas impressed on consciousness which Reid saw as an initial step towards skepticism since it remains impossible to analyze objects and contrast them to their representations. The commonsense philosophy established by Reid saw him recaptured the abandoned Aristotelian view that perception is basically records the world as it is. Based on the commonsense view, there are not four but three aspects of perception which includes the real object, the one perceiving and the actual act of perceiving with no separate stage of representation as proposed by Cartesian Theater (Background to Psychology, p. 163). The philosophy deviated from Cartesian-Lockean views in that in people’s perpetual acts, they are in direct link with the object and not merely with their representative ideas. The philosophy was a return to Aristotle since it suggested direct knowledge of the world which is the basis for direct realism founded by Aristotle. 9. How does the Wizard of Oz illustrate Kant’s explanation of why the world looks the way it does? What is the alternative realist view? Which do you prefer? The Wizard of Oz is a tale of an emerald city which effectively and efficiently is suitable in demonstrating the perspective of Emmanuel Kant of why the world looks the way it does. In the city of Oz, each person entering it is offered green spectacles which must be worn at every moment. The spectacles make every aspect of the city appear green and hence, Oz is an Emerald City. If the Ozzittes were fitted with green eye lenses at birth and they were unaware of it. The Ozzittes would live naturally knowing that all things are in shade of green since objects imposes themselves on the mind and everything appears as it is, because they are what they are as highlighted in the Enlightment and the Science of Human Nature, p.165. However, the truth is that Ozzites see things in shade of green owing to the altered nature of their eyes. Based on this tale, Kant’s view is that the mind of human beings or what is referred to as the Transcendental Ego or Self impresses particular Transcendental categories of understanding on experience. Kant believed that categories were rationally necessary prerequisites for all experiences. This means that the realm of what people can know, particular truths can be impressed on them since each occurrence has a cause and objects do exist in space of three-dimension as discussed by Background to Psychology, p.166. According to Kant inquiries that may seem simple and clear that are actually inquires with no answers since they cannot be attended to within the dominion of phenomena such as the existence of a Supreme Being, God. Conclusively, Kant indicates that the world of experience is established by the transcendental categories of perception. According to Lecture 5, p.5, Kant sought to establish why the world is the way it is by splitting the world into two realms namely the phenomenal real, which refers to things as perceived and noumenal realms which refers to things in themselves. Human beings are directly accessible to the phenomenal realms that are greatly the output of the mind. This indicates that the world is based on people’s impressions on their mind from the external after which, the mind designs the impressions into form. Based on this sentiments, Kant suggested that the mind impressed on experience a priori intuition of time, space and Transcendental categories of understanding which generated the view referred to as objective idealism since the mind builds reality and reality therefore becomes objective. Alternative to objective idealism view adopted by Kant is representationism that suggests that human senses only offers indirect knowledge and the senses create only representations and are what people directly perceive. With the shift from direct realism to representationism has generated problems in philosophy and psychology as discussed by (Leahey 2000, p. 87). My preferred realist view is the objective idealism advocated by Emmanuel Kant since it takes on a neutral point in discussing questions that cannot be dealt with in the phenomenal realm such the existence of God. Unlike Hume who suggested that since one cannot perceive God, God does not exist. Be it as it may, representationism, which takes the Cartesian way of thinking, is a core approach in cognitive science there is no cognition without representation and also cognitive science as highlighted by Lecture 5, p.6. 10. Why was Darwin’s theory considered to be objectionable? Is our attitude to his theory different today? Darwinism is attributed to enhanced development of varied areas such as comparative psychology and individual variances among others and more significantly, it is associated with bringing psychology and philosophy back on route after the detour that was caused by Cartesian views although temporarily. The Darwin theory largely applied to physical attributes and physiological organs but had minimal highlight on the evolution of mind and behavior (Lecture 6, p.3). Darwin was ignorant of the genetic theory and therefore was unable to explain the main causes of variations and how they are transmitted. Be it as it may, Darwin’s theory of evolution was hugely objectionable by the religion although what was objectionable was much larger than just religion as echoed by (Lecture 6, p. 2). According to the Lecture, negative reactions generated from views against mechanization of human activities and therefore, Darwin’s integration of theological and ethical considerations is what devastated the theory. It challenged moral nature of human beings that has been founded on spirituality and free-will which saw humans as different from animals. Be it as it may, the objectification is as a result of misinterpretation and over applying the theory since Darwin did not suggest all things are genetically determined (Lecture 6, p. 3). 11. William James’s theory of emotion reminds us that psychology is not just about the brain, but also involves the body. Discuss. As earlier highlighted, Thomas James made credible contribution to psychology among them rejection of mind stuff theory established by empiricists, contributions on the concept of self and James’ theory of emotion. In relation to the theory of emotion, psychology is not merely about the brain but entails the body where emotions are states of the body (Lecture 6, p. 4). As illustrated in the lecture, seeing a bear does not lead to one feeling fear and the fear causing physiological changes that allows them to learn but instead, seeing a bear leads to the body responding with physiological changes such as sweating, which is the emotion of fear. James suggests that consciousness is functional. According to James’ emotional theory, lack of bodily changes could develop into a situation where one relies on cognitive judgment to judge the bear as life-threatening but not the experience of emotion of fear which illustrates the important role body plays in psychology where the mental framework is linked to the corporeal frame. 12. Discuss how James’s claim that consciousness does not exist led to the neorealist alternative to the Cartesian Way of Ideas William James was a philosopher who focused on the purposive action of the mind on its environment. As highlighted in Lecture 6, p.3, William James established that what constitute consciousness is less significant than what it does which illustrate the significance of function. The basic function of consciousness is to make a decision. Although he did not mind elements such as choice and purpose, James had strong belief that there were empirical means of analyzing the elements and an individual and spiritual ways. Although James is a difficult philosopher to categorize since he had varied opinions on varied issues, one ideal that was distinct of James was that he separated his empirical and scientific psychology from his ethical, spiritual and personal views. As discussed by Lecture 6, p. 4, there are three fundamental contributions James made to psychology among them the rejection of existence of consciousness, the concept of the self and contributions to the theory of emotion. In regards to rejection of existence of consciousness, James indicated that consciousness was not constituted of static elements such as ideas and sensations and instead it encompasses a stream of thoughts. As highlighted by Lecture 6, p. 4, “Consciousness, then, does not appear to itself chopped up in bits. Such words as 'chain' or 'train' do not describe it fitly as it presents itself in the first instance. It is nothing jointed; it flows. A 'river' or a 'stream' are the metaphors by which it is most naturally described. In talking of it hereafter, let us call it the stream of thought, of consciousness…” James is categorical in stating that consciousness does not exist as an entity but as a relation among objects and subjects, between the known and the knower which points towards direct realism view. James perspective of consciousness as a relation and not an entity established neorealist view which rejected Cartesian way of ideas promoted by Descartes that suggested consciousness being transparent to itself where the mind knows whatever is in the mind. In contrast to Descartes, James suggest that knowing forms the first relation and one knowing that they know forms a separate and subsequent relation, which may not happen always since one can know something and not know that they know about it, which might be unconscious (Lecture, 6, p. 4). The understanding that there exists an unconscious psychological life opens avenues for analysis of these processes. Among other scholars who followed the neorealist view includes Sigmund Freud. References Lecture 1-6 Leahey, T. H. (2004). A history of psychology (6th ed.). New Jersey: Pearson Education. Read More

The use of critical inquiry advocated by Socrates are very relevant in modern environment although they generate confronting issues and difficulty for the education instructors since it advocates for challenging the authority by students which easily exposes the individual errors of the teachers. Due to the failure to understand Socrates, those in power indicted Socrates for claims of corrupting the Athens youths since he encouraged them to challenge decisions made by those in positions of power and authority.

Socrates incorporated critical inquiry the basis of scientific attitude with the sanction to -know thyself. According to Lecture 2, p. 4, in incorporating the origins of scientific approach with the beginning of psychology as a discipline of psychotherapy has generated into the use of critical analysis and evidence –based practice in major fields such in education sector and in the health sector. Where teachers are advised to help their students know how to critically analyze content and in so doing helping them assess the validity, reliability, relevance and credibility of material and information content and clinical and nursing personnel are routinely taught and obligated to base their diagnosis, treatment and management of diseases on evidence-based practice respectively.

The views of Socrates that people should be critical of their actions, thoughts and conduct ensures that people are in tune with what they do and think, hence self control as indicated by Background to psychology, p.48. More importantly his critical approach to issues allows for critical analyses and the use of evidence –based practice which ensures that information relied on is not only factual and relevant but also credible and acceptable across the board. Background to psychology, p.48 suggests that Socrates helped define the nature and the meaning of abstracts human concepts like justice and beauty.

As noted in Lecture 2, p. 5 & 6, Socrates insisted on people examining their life to make it worth living. Socrates’ probing technique of inquiry compels people to confront and analyze their assumptions and attitudes which enhance their ability to acquire self knowledge. The critical approach supported and advanced by Socrates, helps alters the belief as and assumptions of people about their cognitions which is applicable in modern day-cognitive behavioral therapies. 2. What is meant by “Ockham’s razor”, and how do Ockham’s views illustrate it?

Do you believe it is a principle which psychology should follow today? Ockham’s razor is a principle that was intensely promoted by William of Ockham, a philosopher who argued that there are no scientific and empirical basis for believing in an immaterial, immortal soul when responding to the radical distinction between faith and reason as indicated by Lecture 3, p.2. As stated by the lecture, William of Ockham believed that “As far as reason or philosophy goes, the mind may be a perishable entity dependent on the body.

It is only from faith that knowledge of the immortal soul comes. This separation of faith and reason greatly weakened theology and metaphysics, but it helped bring science into being.” The Ockham ‘s razor also referred to as the law of economy or the law of parsimony is described as a principle that promotes the use of simplest explanations on methodological basis. The principle advices people to apply theories that are minimally efficient so long as they are able to function the same with less.

The principle suggests that plurality must be conceived without necessity and that an entity should not be multiplied beyond need. The principle is one which is critical and significantly so for modern psychology in modern day since it helps psychologists and therapies to always ensure they do not do with more what can be done with fewer which reduces complexities. 3. Briefly describe one characteristic of the Medieval world view, and discuss the ways in which things are similar and/or different today.

Read More