DISCUSSION

Discuss the contention that that both philosophy and physiology have contributed to the founding of psychology. You can expound a little on the British, Descartes, Wundt and other physiologists. Which do you think contributed the most?

NOTE** The writing must be in YOUR OWN WORDS. No references is needed. No quotes. Just discuss the questions and answer thoroughly.
See Sample below: YOU CANNOT USE THIS SAMPLE.

SAMPLE OF DISCUSSION BOARD – WEEK 3

I believe that the advances in physiology helped spur psychology as a science the most, and I actually attribute most of this influence to the power of the zeitgeist. While the 17th century (Berkeley’s time) was a time of philosophical thought, the 18th and 19th century ushered in a time period of science. And compared to philosophy, science was actually more important for several reasons, one major reason being public health.

Public health was a major issue in the 18th century, especially with the spread of imperialism. All of a sudden, not only were local diseases a problem, but so were exotic diseases both at home and afar in colonies. This led to a variety of innovations, such as the vaccine, sanitary reform, Pasteur’s germ theory of disease, etc. All of these items moved scientific thought and experimentation to the forefront of public knowledge. Here was an area of thought that actually provided answers and had tangible results.

This was very unlike philosophy and theology, which attempted to cure disease and similar problems through prayer, the power of thought alone, superstitious activities, or divine intervention. The populace could directly see the benefits of scientific advancement.
In this way, psychology eventually evolved from being a philosophical treatise on the human mind (e.g. “does our mind or our soul control us? do things have inherent properties? etc.) to an actual science that could be explored, used to find answers, and then applied to the health of the common people. I believe Wundt is arguably one of the most important figures in the founding and rise of psychology. He was highly influenced by the scientific method and equipment that was in use in physiology labs, so he basically said, “What if we used this same rigorous method and applied it to the human mind?” In that moment, psychology became something about which you could ask questions and gain tangible answers, unlike philosophy and like physiology.

Going back to the zeitgeist, this popular interest in health and medicine meant that psychology had more opportunities to be funded as a science, in vein with anatomy and physiology. It meant that experimental research would be published, not philosophical hypotheses and musings. It meant that for a time, psychology could be seen on equal footing with medical research since it too could utilize scientific methods (alas, not quite the case today). I think the rise of science and the subsequent focus on form and function (i.e. physiology) also helped the psychological community as a whole turn away from high-level, pie-in-the-sky theological and philosophical issues and redirect focus to more pertinent ideas, such as neurology, cognition, memory, and sensory processing. This focus on immediate and applicable ideas is still the major focus in psychology today.
TAKE ADVANTAGE OF OUR PROMOTIONAL DISCOUNT DISPLAYED ON THE WEBSITE AND GET A DISCOUNT FOR YOUR PAPER NOW!