Psychology

1. Using information from the Brock and Lovett articles, as well as the information in Leahey on Old History and New History, explain the change from the old to the new way of regarding the history of psychology. What are the changes involved and what are the advantages and disadvantages of each approach

It was recorded that psychology was once vividly understood as the practical application of a philosophy. This distinct kind of philosophy was deeply rooted from moralism and religious principles, stressing mans need to be attuned  to his spiritual nature (Leahey 2003). By the end of the 19th century, the newer scientific, rationalistic approach to the subject of psychology emerges in opposition. The emergence of the modern rationalistic approach prompted the study of psychology to break all connections with its philosophical roots and enter a different mileage of definition. As it tries to liberate itself from the traditional philosophical musing and concepts, the history of psychology is being transformed to be the objective, empirical and value-free science of human nature. This shift from the traditional adage is said to be the substitution of the values of scientism (Leahey 2003).

Approaches used in examining the evolvement of the history of psychology include emphasizing the influence of non-psychological factors the utilization of great-person approach which takes into consideration works of individuals such as Plato and Freud and the historical development approach which demonstrates how various individuals or events have influenced the changes in an idea or concepts through the years (Hergenhahn 2008). It has been noted that psychology should not be judged because some its aspects rae deemed to be not scientific or even anti-scientific. The advantage of the given approaches is that it opens up avenues for unlimited inquiry to human nature while their main disadvantage is that they can cement psychology into a certain belief or basis.

2. Discuss why psychology can be described both as a science and as a non-science. Include in your discussion the characteristics of science that both Robinson and Leahey examine.

According to Leahey (2003), the parting of psychology from its philosophical roots does not express the notion that the field of study has become purely rational and objective. The term scientism when applied to the concept of psychology relays the idea that the boundaries of psychology are beyond the scope of scientific inquiry.

Given the tenacity of the concept of neutrality, psychology is subjected to the fundamental issue on how objectivity claimed by science is possible. Psychology as both science and non-science posits the query regarding the reliability of psychological performance such as perception and knowledge and the possibility for validating rational data concerning human nature.

3. In early Greek thought, the debate begins concerning whether knowledge comes solely through the physical world, via the senses, or whether knowledge demands something in addition to sense experience---reason and logic. Using the material from Leahey, chapter two, choose several Greek philosophers who think knowledge comes from sense experience, and choose several who think that sense experience alone is not sufficient. Briefly describe the ideas of each philosopher that you choose, explaining why you think they take one position or the other.

Greek philosophy centered on the role of reason and inquiry. Socrates gave to the world Plato and his theories that focused on the relevance of method of inquiry. Plato can be considered as the philosophers who had examined that knowledge acquired through the sense remains confused and impure and that the contemplatative soul that parts away from the world can obtain the true knowledge. On the other hand, Aristotle, being one of Platos students can be considered as modern empiricist as he placed more value on knowledge gained through senses.

Before the popularity of Socrates came Parmenides, a pre-Socratic Greek philosopher who proposed that there is an eternal pure being beyond the presence of nature. According to Parmenides, there are two opposing sides of the world. There is the appearance of the world which expresses how things seem to be or how an individual intends to perceive things. But Parmenides emphasized that senses are not to be trusted since they are fallible in nature. Ergo, he extremely favored the rationalism.

4. In the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, Greek philosophy was continued but transformed. Choose three thinkers from the Middle Ages or the Renaissance and explain how they used the ideas of specific Greek philosophers in their own work. Be sure to explain how particular Greek thinkers influenced their ideas.

The term Renaissance is a French word which means new birth (Symonds 2008). It is a period in which great scholars or thinkers who had became humanists, implying a strong admiration for the achievements of the human race. Among the greatest thinkers of the Renaissance period are  Martin Luther, Marsilio Ficino, and Niccolo Macchiavelli.

Luther instigated the establishment of the Protestant Reformation and expressed interest for Aristotle due to his concept of reason and later on realized reason along could not lead men to God so he expressed negation of Aristotles emphasis on reason. Ficino is known as the reviver of Neoplatonism as he was the one how espoused the worlds ensoulment and its integration with the human soul. Macchiavelli adheres to Aristotles virtue ethics in which humans are obliged to live virtuously but admits that living as such does not necessarily lead to happiness.