Advertisement

Perennial Problems of (Educational) Psychology

  • Wolff-Michael Roth
Chapter
Part of the Cultural Psychology of Education book series (CPED, volume 9)

Abstract

Ninety years ago, psychology had been characterized in terms of a history of critiques: scientific psychology, established by Wilhelm Wundt and his followers, and its empirical methods focusing on biological processes (e.g. reaction time experiments) was opposed to mythological or interpretive psychology aimed at the (meta-physical) meanings (Politzer 1929; Vygotsky 1997). One of the essential schisms associated with the two forms of psychology continues to the present day: the dichotomy of body and mind. It exists because scientific psychology is concerned with biological processes whereas interpretive psychology is concerned with the ideal meanings. The schism is a direct consequence of the “tacit presupposition of the mind with its private ideas which are in fact qualities without intelligible connection with the entities represented” (Whitehead 1929/1978, 76). Even though the problem was framed such a long time ago, psychologists and cognitive scientists have been wondering much more recently about how the (mental, immaterial) world of (abstract) ideas is connected to the physical world of the body, a problem that has come to be known as the symbol grounding problem (Harnad 1990). That psychophysiological schism manifests itself in the traditionally separate psychological treatments of intellect and affect (Vygotsky 1987). This separate treatment has continued to the present day, where mental-cognitive processes are thought to be influenced by affective states only from the outside, generally in terms of decreasing mental performance. The “affective domain (system)” is theorized separately from the “psychomotor domain (system),” which is in turn separate from the “cognitive domain (system)” (e.g. Sternberg and Williams 2010). We thereby get something like a system composed of subsystems, each of which exists in its own right (Fig. 1.1). The ways in which the independent subsystems come to interact does not tend to be further specified. This leaves open the question how an affective system, which quite obviously has bodily-physical qualities (e.g. blushing, increased heart rates) can ever influence a non-bodily system (ideal meanings). Thus, for example, how would affects, which are manifestations of physiological events, come to bear on something that is not material physiological, such as thinking and ideas? In other words and using a computer analogy, we have to ask, “How does the hardware affect the software?” In computing, of course, the former does not affect the latter – or the results of a computation would (might) be different depending on the chip used because of material differences.

References

  1. Bakhtin, M. M. (1993). Toward a philosophy of the act. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
  2. Bergson, H. (1911). La perception du changement [The perception of change]. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  3. Dewey, J. (1929). Experience and nature. London: George Allen and Unwin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Dewey, J., & Bentley, A. F. (1999). Knowing and the known. In R. Handy & E. E. Hardwood (Eds.), Useful procedures of inquiry (pp. 97–209). Great Barrington: Behavioral Research Council. (First published in 1949)Google Scholar
  5. Harnad, S. (1990). The symbol grounding problem. Physica D, 42, 335–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Il’enkov, E. V. (1977). Dialectical logic: Essays on its history and theory. Moscow: Progress.Google Scholar
  7. Johnson, M. (1987). The body in the mind: The bodily basis of imagination, reason, and meaning. Chicago: Chicago University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Mead, G. H. (1932). The philosophy of the present. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  9. Merleau-Ponty, M. (1945). Phénoménologie de la perception [Phenomenology of perception]. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
  10. Nancy, J.-L. (2008). The discourse of the syncope: Logodaedalus. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Nietzsche, F. (1922). Nachgelassene Werke: Zweite Abteilung Band XVI [Unpublished works. Part 2 vol. 16]. Leipzig: Alfred Kröner Verlag.Google Scholar
  12. Politzer, G. (1929). Les fondements de la psychologie: Psychologie mythologique et psychologie scientifique [The foundations of psychology: Mythological psychology and scientific psychology]. La Revue de la Psychologie Concrète, 1, 9–64.Google Scholar
  13. Ricœur, P. (1986). Du texte à l’action: Essaies d’herméneutique II [From text to action: Essays in hermeneutics 2]. Paris: Éditions du Seuil.Google Scholar
  14. Roth, W.-M., & Thom, J. (2009). Bodily experience and mathematical conceptions: From classical views to a phenomenological reconceptualization. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 70, 175–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Sheets-Johnstone, M. (2009). The corporeal turn: An interdisciplinary reader. Exeter: Imprint Academic.Google Scholar
  16. Snow, R. E. (1992). Aptitude theory: Yesterday, today, and tomorrow. Educational Psychologist, 27, 5–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Spinuzzi, C. (2019). From superhumans to supermediators: Locating the extraordinary in CHAT. In A. Yasnitsky (Ed.), Questioning Vygotsky’s legacy: Scientific psychology or heroic cult. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  18. Stahl, G. (2015). Conceptualizing the intersubjective group. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 10, 209–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Sternberg, R., & Williams, W. M. (2010). Educational psychology (2nd ed.). Boston: Merrill.Google Scholar
  20. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Vygotsky, L. S. (1987). The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky, vol. 1: Problems of general psychology. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  22. Vygotsky, L. S. (1989). Concrete human psychology. Soviet Psychology, 27(2), 53–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Vygotsky, L. S. (1997). The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky, vol. 3: Problems of the theory and history of psychology. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  24. Whitehead, A. N. (1919). An enquiry concerning the principles of natural knowledge. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Whitehead, A. N. (1938). Modes of thought. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  26. Whitehead, A. N. (1978). Process and reality: An essay in cosmology. New York: Free Press. (First published in 1929)Google Scholar
  27. Yasnitski, A. (2019). Vygotsky’s psychology of superman: From utopia to concrete science. In A. Yasnitsky (Ed.), Questioning Vygotsky’s legacy: Scientific psychology or heroic cult. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  28. Zavershneva, E. I. (2010). The way to freedom. Journal of Russian and East European Psychology, 48(1), 61–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Wolff-Michael Roth
    • 1
  1. 1.University of VictoriaVictoriaCanada

Personalised recommendations