Psychology's Guiding Lights

Wilhelm Wundt and William James. How much psych is corroded onto these two lugnuts? Well, according to Dr C George Boeree's page:

"Wilhelm Wundt and William James are usually thought of as the fathers of psychology, as well as the founders of psychology’s first two great “schools.” ..... Their lives overlap, for example, with Wilhelm Wundt born in 1832 and dying in 1920, while William James was born ten years later and died ten years earlier. Both have claims to having established the first psychology lab in 1875. And neither named his school. As you will see, there are other commonalities as well, personal and philosophical.

I believe we haven't seen thinkers of their stature in psychology since."

We've met Wundt with his "The human Soul can no longer exist, ... in the light of our current physiological knowledge." [Any shred of which physiological knowledge today's pill-pushing for bribes Psychiatrists are Still waiting for: 88 years after Wundt's death.]

So let's peer into William James kitchen.

In 1880, his title was changed to assistant professor of philosopher, which is where, in those days, psychology actually belonged. [& still does] In 1885, he became a full professor. Despite his battles with depression, he was well liked by his students and known for his great sense of humor. Even his textbook would have a certain lightness that we rarely find in textbooks. He seemed to enjoy teaching. On the other hand,

HE DISLIKED RESEARCH, DID ALMOST NONE OF IT, and said that LABS WERE BASICALLY A WASTE OF RESOURCES!"

[Just like the Labs at Pharma today. Why perform all that expensive research when there's the cost of all those pens, clipboards, meals, $45K career advancement awards, and continuing medical education grants, to ply Docs with? Just sign live people up: and Lawyers to deal with the families of those who don't live through their research]


"An example of functionalist thinking can be found in James’ view of emotions (the James-Lange theory):

Our natural way of thinking about these standard emotions is that the mental perception of some fact excites the mental affection called the emotion, and that this latter state of mind gives rise to the bodily expression. My thesis on the contrary is that the bodily changes follow directly the PERCEPTION of the exciting fact, and that our feeling of the same changes as they occur IS the emotion. Common sense says, we lose our fortune, are sorry and weep; we meet a bear, are frightened and run; we are insulted by a rival, are angry and strike. The hypothesis here to be defended says that this order of sequence is incorrect, that the one mental state is not immediately induced by the other, that the bodily manifestations must first be interposed between, and that the more rational statement is that we feel sorry because we cry, angry because we strike, afraid because we tremble, and not that we cry, strike, or tremble, because we are sorry, angry, or fearful, as the case may be. Without the bodily states following on the perception, the latter would be purely cognitive in form, pale, colourless, destitute of emotional warmth. We might then see the bear, and judge it best to run, receive the insult and deem it right to strike, but we could not actually feel afraid or angry.

[In English: Gut Feelings]
...
To begin with, readers of the Journal do not need to be reminded that the nervous system of every living thing is but a bundle of predispositions to react in particular ways upon the contact of particular features of the environment. As surely as the hermit-crab's abdomen presupposes the existence of empty whelk-shells somewhere to be found,so surely do the hound's olfactories imply the existence, on the one hand, of deer's or foxes' feet, and on the other, the tendency to follow up their tracks. The neural machinery is but a hyphen between determinate arrangements of matter ourtside the body and determinate impulses to inhibition or discharge within its organs. When the hen sees a white oval object on the ground, she cannot leave it; she must keep upon it and return to it, until at last its transformation into a little mass of moving chirping down elicits from her machinery an entirely new set of performances. The love of man for woman, or of the human mother for her babe, our wrath at snakes and our fear of precipices, may all be described similarly, as instances of the way in which peculiarly conformed pieces of the world's furniture will fatally call forth most particular mental and bodily reactions, in advance of, and often in direct opposition to, the verdict of our deliberate reason concerning them. The labours of Darwin and his successors are only just beginning to reveal the universal parasitism of each creature upon other special things, and the way in which each creature brings the signature of its special relations stamped on its nervous system with it upon the scene.

[In English: It's in the LAST SENTENCE: Darwinism, universal parasitism, the signature of its special relations [sign the check] stamped on its nervous system with it upon the scene.]
...
Whistling to keep up courage is no mere figure of speech. On the other hand, sit all day in a moping posture, sigh, and reply to everything with a dismal voice, and your melancholy lingers. There is no more valuable precept in moral education than this, as all who have experience know: if we wish to conquer undesirable emotional tendencies in ourselves, we must assiduously, and in the first instance cold-bloodedly, go through the outward motions of those contrary dispositions we prefer to cultivate. The reward of persistency will infallibly come, in the fading out of the sullenness or depression, and the advent of real cheerfulness and kindliness in their stead. Smooth the brow, brighten the eye, contract the dorsal rather than the ventral aspect of the frame, and speak in a major key, pass the genial compliment, and your heart must be frigid indeed if it do not gradually thaw!

[In English: Do It.]

In the first paragraph, note the holistic idea that emotion is nothing without the body. In the second, he points out that emotion has evolutionary purpose. And in the third, James emphasizes a practical application of his theory!"

"In ... [1878] [James] signed on with the publisher Holt to write a psychology textbook. It was supposed to take two years -- it took him 12.

We're reminded of a burger ad.

"Where's the beef?" Our BEEF, is, that the way 'mental health' has becoming a national cancer, there's a Pharma putsch on to sign up Psychologists - with NO medical training - to sign onto the old prescription pads of death, right alongside Psychiatrists. Back to Dr. Boeree.

"I believe we haven't seen thinkers of their stature in psychology since." [Sweet Jesus, We would Hope Not.]