Associationistic Theory
Introduction
Over the years many scholars have tried to explain the epistemological nature of the mental content and the underlying principles in it. Experience has been regarded widely as the major source of data presented in the mind. This is an indisputable fact. This study seeks to explore the doctrine of the theory of associationism. In particular, the views of David Hume and his doctrine of resemblance, contiguity in time or place, and cause or effect the positivism of John Locke David Hartley and his law of contiguity and Mill on ontology of concrete things will be considered.
Associationism
Associationism is a theory in psychology which states that association is the basic principle of all mental activity (American Heritage, 2009). It purports that all mental activity is based on the relationship between basic mental events, for instance, sensations and feelings (Collins English Dictionary, 2003). It is the theory that all consciousness derives from the combination, in accordance with the law of association, of specific simple and definitive elements got from sense experiences (Columbia (Encyclopedia 2010).
Epistemologically the aspect of intentionality is greatly considered. Intentionality states that the knowledge that a person possesses is always about something (Lonergan, 2007). There is no mental consciousness that is not founded on reality. In other words, everything in the mind is also in the concrete experience. For instance, if X has an idea of a chair, the idea as it exists in Xs mind is of a chair, probably, in his own house, or in his office or in his college. Contrary to what idealism holds that everything is ideas, associationism will believe that everything is but a representation of concrete objects in the experience.
Intentionality and associationism have one and the same connotation in that the mental representations are always about something that is not illusory or hallucinated. In fact, for an associationist, illusions or hallucinations are not possible. Consider the following X begins to shout aloud that she is seeing walking trees coming towards himher. X is convinced that he is faced with such a reality and is really frightened. Now, this is an illusion because it is a factious mental representation founded on reality. On the other hand, Y screams in his room because he can see flying loaves of bread. He is frightened that the loaves of bread want to bite him, this is funny Now, this is a hallucination because it is not based on real experience. It can be said that Y is seeing his own things. See now Both X and Y mental status lacks sound combination of concrete experience in that there are no walking trees and there are no flying loaves of bread. Remember once again that associationism purports that consciousness is always about some object in the concrete experience.
Law of Association
It is important to note that the phenomenon of association had been looked into by many philosophers and psychologists before Hume. However, they did not regard the issue of association as virtually important. Hume, therefore, set out to analyze the phenomenon and even developed the laws of association. He notes that, the laws of association in regard to the understanding of the mind are similar to what the Newtons laws are to the understanding of the physical world (Bricke, 2010).
It is noted that despite his zeal in developing his associationist ambitions, his works have not had a warm reception from a number of historians of psychology. Hume develops five laws of association where the first three govern the association of ideas. They can be formulated as follows one idea leads to another idea if the two ideas are connected by resemblance one idea leads to another idea if the two ideas are connected by spatial or temporal contiguity and one idea leads to another idea if both ideas are related by causation (Bricke, 2010).
Hume argues that there is a principle of connection between the different thoughts or ideas of the mind their presentation to the memory or imagination is characterized by a certain degree of method and regularity. He further argues that there are three principles of connexion among ideas. They are as follows Resemblance, Contiguity in time or place, and Cause or Effect (Hume, 1914). Consider the following example
X picks her album and begins to go through it. Among the photos she is going through are of those that belong to her family. She is in her room together with her friends. Immediately she comes across the photo of her mother, and begins to tell others about how her mother has grown big and that she looks beautiful. This by itself is an indication that the picture takes X to the original stature of her mother. It can be seen that whenever one looks at a picture it leads to the original. This also applies to a person who encounters a poster bearing President Obama what will go on in the mind of this person is the real President Obama.
Again X starts talking about her brothers and sisters after seeing the photo of her mother. The mention of her mother leads to the mention of other persons related to her. This also happens when one begins talking about World Trade House and how it was bombed, the next thing that follows is the mention of Pentagon and other buildings adjacent to it. In other words, the mentioning of World Trade Center necessarily invokes other enquiries concerning the others.
Still X comes across a picture that reminded her of her fractured hand. In this context, she immediately talks of the pain that accompanied it. She starts sharing with her friends about how her mother took her to the hospital so that she could get some pain killers to ease the situation. See now In normal circumstances, when one remembers of a wound, the next thing that follows are phrases like oops, it was really painful or ouch..the pain was too much
John Locke (2010) purports that ideas are linked in the mind in such a way that having one idea immediately points to another idea, though the two ideas are not as such connected with each other. He argues further that they are linked through their having been experienced together on a number of occasions in the past. He attaches a great value to the psychological tendency to correlate ideas through experience in that it helps in the education of children.
David Hartley was an English Philosopher and an initiator of the Associationist school of psychologists. John Locke talked of tabura rasa which means that the mind is like an empty surface until it acquires data from sense experience. Hartley on the other hand, considers the law of contiguity, synchronous and successive. He aims to explain not only the phenomenon of memory, but also the phenomena of emotion, of reasoning, and of voluntary and involuntary action. According to Hartley sensation derives from a vibration of the minute particles of the medullary substance of the nerves. These vibrations create in the brain fainter vibrations or vibratiuncles which thereafter symbolize ideas of sensation.
These vibrations in the brains are determined by the kind of past experience the person has had in the past, and also the circumstances present to the person. Those sensations that are largely associated together become each associated with the ideas corresponding to the others. In addition, the ideas relating to the associated sensations become associated together (Barbara, 1976) He argues further that voluntary action proceeds from the firm connection between a motion and a sensation or idea on the other hand and from a physical point of view, voluntary action is explained between and ideal and a motory vibration. This brings about the idea of determinism in the mans Free will.
Notably, Mill applies empiricist principles to the ontology of concrete things and his associationist principles to their perception. Mill gives an example of an orange in that when one cuts it, she is represented with particular sensory impressions, shapes, and colors and textures those which one had not had a prior perception. He further argues that the impressions one get from the cut orange did exist prior regardless of the fact that they had been perceived. According to him, experience forms the persons habit of expectation such that she not only forms the conception of the perceived things as existing prior to their conception but also enable the person to believe in their existence. The elements of the orange are believed to have existed prior to their perception hence they are possible sensations, which expectations become conditional certainties. These possibilities which are conditional certainties become permanent possibilities hence differentiating them from unclear and blurred possibilities which experience gives no warrant for reckoning upon.
A critical Reflection on Associationist Theory
It can be argued and justifiably so that proponents of associationism refer to one and the same thing. Indeed, they all have different approaches in their doctrines but it is evident that they are all empiricists. In fact, the doctrine of empiricism and the doctrine of associationism have the same object of study. They all purport that the mind is a dormant enterprise and is determined by experience through perception.
One would accept the doctrine of association in the dictum that nothing is in the intellect that was not there in the senses or nothing is in the mental content that was not there in the concrete experience. In deed, every person owes a lot of hisher thought-content through the everyday sensations. X will talk of a tree or a chair or a table or an ice cream by referring to a tree in Washington or a chair in hisher room or a table in hisher school or an ice cream in Vegas and so on and so forth. She cannot talk of the aforementioned items just in the blues she must refer or call to mind certain real experiences encountered. To this extent associationism makes a lot of sense.
The doctrine of Hartley has got some unclear elements. Consider the following case A child goes in a very dusty place. As she is walking a long the path, a car drives by leaving a lot of dust particles behind. Suddenly, the child begins to wipe her eyes and somehow, complains that her eyes are itchy. See the point The child as such feels the impact of the dust in her eyes. Why then cant one feel the same in the case when particles get into the brain andor mind It is clear that Hartley refers to measurable and quantifiable particles getting into the brain system but he does not consider the fact that anything physical and tangible that gets into the body has high chances of been felt or detected.
Inasmuch as association is the basic principle of all mental activity, it is worth noting that the mind is not a dormant entity. It has got its structures that function in different ways in the generation of knowledge. The mind is able to develop its knowledge and judgments and by the way, it is the mind that gives meaning to what it experiences. This is very important. The theory of association does not take into account that the mind is endowed with certain faculties that enable it perform complex functions that experience cannot offer. For instance, when Y sees two oranges and another two more oranges she makes the concept of four. Therefore, is the concept of four a percept or a concept Which experience can one obtain that two oranges added to another two oranges, one gets four Or better still, when one sees a donkey grazing in the playground, she will think of it as an animal, belonging to the class of mammals, and so on and so forth. Now, to this extent the person thinks of the donkey from a higher perspective which cannot be acquired from experience.
In general, the mind is structured such that it works on the data it receives from experience to formulate concepts. In fact conceptualization is purely a mental activity that is completely independent of experience.
Conclusion
We have seen the principle tenets of associationism. I believe that this doctrine is well thought, but it has several defects that need to be addressed. A little bit of rationalism is needed to shape it. They should not regard experience as everything in respect to our mental activity. It is not proper to look at the human mind just as a dormant thing since it has got faculties that have certain functions. The likes of Hume, Mill and others should refer to Lonergan who better explains the acts of mind namely experience, understanding and judgment. Again, the associationist cannot deny that we are rational and not mechanical This fact makes it possible that we do not wholly rely on experience in the formulation of our knowledge. We are the subjects of knowledge and were it not for rationality, nothing could make sense in the world.
Categories:
0 comments:
Post a Comment