2

This question got me thinking:

It is widely held that Philosophy precedes the Sciences, birthing them. and continue to inform them. It is also evident that there are times when science has informed philosophy; advances in cosmology, the introduction of evolution theory, not to mention Physics, some scientific breakthroughs have had profound implications for metaphysics, often spawning new schools of thought and causing trouble for Ethics.

Cognitive science is the consummate example of a cross disciplinary project involving Philosophy. In it, unlike the "one informs the other" paradigm above, Philosophy is contributory within the research process. The focus of cognitive science is cognition, more specifically the "mechanics" of cognition. However it suggests to me that some philosophical questions may be fruitfully studied in this way.

Question: Are there any cross discipline work where Psychology is used for the advancement of philosophical insight?

christo183
  • 2,347
  • 4
  • 13
  • 33
  • Thanks @Gordon, Psychology influencing political philosophy. I wonder how much of that is still going on. – christo183 Nov 12 '18 at 12:44
  • 1
    Nothing like this is going on now. Not really. Why? Because there is no one now like Freud. Freud's theory, as theory, was robust. It could support movement across academia and in the general public. – Gordon Nov 12 '18 at 13:04
  • 1
    The key was that through the 1970s all the intellectuals and even the public could "speak Freudian". It was a common language there is nothing like this today. Also, I would point out the tremendous importance of WWI. The history of this war, the before and after. It is if essential importance. This is the period to study to understand the 20th century IMO. Good question @christo183 . – Gordon Nov 12 '18 at 13:11
  • 1
    This seems way too broad for SE. Isn't [SEP's Cognitive Science](https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/cognitive-science/) pretty much about this? See also [Experimental philosophy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experimental_philosophy). – Conifold Nov 12 '18 at 17:31
  • @Conifold Cognitive science leans more toward a _scientific_ study of cognition, that happens to benefit _from_ philosophy. But I'm looking for Psychological scientific (purportedly) input/benefit _to_ philosophy. Experimental philosophy looked very promising but it seems to be more about "armchair philosophy", and its results would probably benefit psychology and marketing more than philosophy. Do you perhaps know if experimental philosophy has produced some tangibly _philosophic_ results? – christo183 Nov 13 '18 at 06:13
  • @Gordon These are very illuminating insights. To be honest I was thinking that far back, but if I do find contemporary examples, then surly that must be situated in the historical context you've elucidated. – christo183 Nov 13 '18 at 06:21
  • 1
    I should mention behaviorism too. Quine was good friends with B.F. Skinner. For those of a more positivist persuasion, behaviorism was more supportable since it went by observation. I don't know too much about behaviorism though. – Gordon Nov 13 '18 at 15:17
  • 1
    Also I could add Max Wertheimer (real Gestalt-the whole), Piaget (The philosopher Lucien Goldmann worked with him) Constructivist? I'm not sure. Lev Vygotski https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lev_Vygotsky, and even Montessori. How we learn. – Gordon Nov 13 '18 at 15:26
  • 1
    (Husserl-Scheler) and Gestalt came around the same time and were similar in some respects. How we grasp the "whole" almost at an instant. I studied this many years ago but I can't remember much. Also a word we don't hear much today, axiology, these philosophers of value were interested in Gestalt psychology. – Gordon Nov 13 '18 at 15:38
  • It seems thematic, the close relationship Psychology has with Philosophy. Almost as if it struggled to extricate itself from Philosophy, unlike other sciences. And now you mention it: "Gestalt", I've always felt had very metaphysical undertones. And so full circle to the main question, was/is the relationship between Psychology and Philosophy a two-way street, developmentally speaking? – christo183 Nov 13 '18 at 15:41
  • You are right that psychology extricated itself from philosophy and stood on its own feet. In a big way. Psychology overtook religion too in the last century. The Freudian analyst or Jungian analyst became the new sage. The new High Priest. There was some showmanship too. Just like the Church. But this has faded with the entrance of hard science into psychology I think. – Gordon Nov 13 '18 at 16:04
  • Indeed, you can't take a degree in Psychology without classes in statistical analysis and experimental methodology. – christo183 Nov 13 '18 at 16:09
  • 1
    Cognitive science critique of Quine's behaviorism, the revision of formal epistemology in response to the Gettier problem (commonly held ascriptions of knowledge contradict those based on the justified true belief definition of Plato). Similarly, field studies put in question Kripke's causal theory of reference in formal semantics. More broadly, the ascension of psychology in the 20-th century led to a remaking of philosophy at large, see [D’Agostini's From a Continental Point of View](http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/09672550110058821), especially p.360. – Conifold Nov 13 '18 at 18:44
  • @Conifold Would you say psychology was the primary agent of this "remake", or only part of a broader context of scientific success? – christo183 Nov 14 '18 at 08:16
  • It was the primary agent in posing challenges to philosophy as the traditional "science of the mind", and those were the most threatening, the rest of scientific success was assimilable by more traditional means. – Conifold Nov 14 '18 at 18:39

0 Answers0