Mathematics, Experience, and Laboratories: Herbart's and Brentano's Role in the Rise of Scientific Psychology
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
History of the Human Sciences 23 (3):72-94 (2010)
In this article we present and compare two early attempts to establish psychology as an independent scientific discipline that had considerable influence in central Europe: the theories of Johann Friedrich Herbart (1776—1841) and Franz Brentano (1838—1917). While both of them emphasize that psychology ought to be conceived as an empirical science, their conceptions show revealing differences. Herbart starts with metaphysical principles and aims at mathematizing psychology, whereas Brentano rejects all metaphysics and bases his method on a conception of inner perception (as opposed to inner observation) as a secondary consciousness, by means of which one gets to be aware of all of one’s own conscious phenomena. Brentano’s focus on inner perception brings him to deny the claim that there could be unconscious mental phenomena — a view that stands in sharp contrast to Herbart’s emphasis on unconscious, ‘repressed’ presentations as a core element of his mechanics of mind. Herbart, on the other hand, denies any role for psychological experiments, while Brentano encouraged laboratory work, thus paving the road for the more experimental work of his students like Stumpf and Meinong. By briefly tracing the fate of the schools of Herbart and Brentano, respectively, we aim to illustrate their impact on the development of psychological research, mainly in central Europe.
|Keywords||Brentano, Franz Herbart, Johann Friedrich History of Psychology Phenomenology Intentionality experimental psychology|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Dermot Moran (1996). Brentano's Thesis. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 70 (70):1-27.
Carole Maigné (2002). Le réalisme de Johann Friedrich Herbart, une ambition critique. Revue de Métaphysique et de Morale 3 (3):305-323.
Werner Ehm (2010). Broad Views of the Philosophy of Nature: Riemann, Herbart, and the “Matter of the Mind”. Philosophical Psychology 23 (2):141 – 162.
Roderick M. Chisholm (1986). Brentano and Intrinsic Value. Cambridge University Press.
Dermot Moran (2000). Heidegger's Critique of Husserl's and Brentano's Accounts of Intentionality. Inquiry 43 (1):39 – 65.
Philip J. Bartok (2005). Brentano's Intentionality Thesis: Beyond the Analytic and Phenomenological Readings. Journal of the History of Philosophy 43 (4):437-460.
Karsten Kenklies (2012). Educational Theory as Topological Rhetoric: The Concepts of Pedagogy of Johann Friedrich Herbart and Friedrich Schleiermacher. Studies in Philosophy and Education 31 (3):265-273.
Kevin Mulligan & Barry Smith (1985). Franz Brentano on the Ontology of Mind. [REVIEW] Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 45 (4):627 - 644.
Dale Jacquette (ed.) (2004). The Cambridge Companion to Brentano. Cambridge University Press.
Linda L. McAlister (ed.) (1976). The Philosophy of Brentano. Humanities Press.
Added to index2010-08-06
Total downloads46 ( #94,264 of 1,911,616 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #458,010 of 1,911,616 )
How can I increase my downloads?