On Thu, 10 Apr 2014 12:00:40 -0700, Christopher Green wrote:
Very interesting response, Mike. I agree with all of it except one
thing:
that "Psychology and Education" was primarily a response to Cattell.
See, this is what happens when you refer to two articles with the
same title but don't identify which one you're referring to. Below
I identify both of them and let's call the Psych Rev "P&E#1" and
the Ed Rev one "P&E#2". Quoting from "P&E#1"
"In the last number of the PSYCHOLOGICAL REVIEW Professor
Cattell discusses an article which I published in the Atlantic Monthly,
and comes to the conclusion that the theses of my paper are in
contradiction both with his convictions and with my own earlier
writings.
I cannot agree that there is any difference at all between my present
and my earlier attitude, but, above all, I am very glad, indeed, to find
that, at bottom, even Professor Cattell does not really disagree with
me." (p500)
Munsterberg goes on to respond to Cattell's objections and it is
clear who has the status here (hint: not the Harvard guy).
Munsterberg does refer to the P&E#2 and that he will do a
hatchet job, er, further malign, I mean, point out the weaknesses
in the child study research as proposed by Hall.
If you look back at "The Danger from Experimental Psychology,"
you'll see that, about 2/3 the way through, Münsterberg takes a brief
swipe at Hall's "Child Study," but says he doesn't have time there
to deal with the "treat" that it poses. The first half of "Psychology
and "Education" is where he comes back to dismantle Hall
questionnaire by questionnaire.
You mean P&E#2. Yes, you are correct.
Only then does he return to the earlier task of explaining why
(he thinks) experimental (and physiological) psychology has
nothing to offer treachers either.
Don't forget sucker punching Scripture and implying that he
plagiarized. However, Munsterberg seems to a addressing
a larger, namely, in a number of colleges and universities
experimental psychology faculty were located in departments
of pedagogy or education and the psychology labs were used
by students in education at both the undergraduate and graduate
level. This was certainly true at NYU (well into the 20th century)
and apparently in a few other schools (Thorndike at Teachers
College at Columbia). The role of psychological labs in
programs of pedagogy/education at the beginning of the 1900s
is something I'll be looking into.
-Mike Palij
New York University
[email protected]
On 2014-04-10, at 1:49 PM, Mike Palij wrote:
On Thu, 10 Apr 2014 09:29:28 -0700, Christopher Green wrote:
Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to discuss the
following claim:
"If the teacher, in the hope of understanding the inner life of
children better, studies the ganglion cells under the microscope,
he could substitute just as well the reading of Egyptian hieroglyphs.
All talk about the brain is, from the standpoint of the teacher,
merely
cant."
- Hugo Münsterberg, "Psychology and Education," 1898.
NOTE: In 1898, Munsterberg wrote two articles with the title
"Psychology and Education": one was in Psychological Review
Münsterberg, H. (1898). Psychology and Education. Psychological
Review, 5(5), 500-503. doi:10.1037/h0065106
And the other was in Educational Review:
Munsterberg, H. (1898). Psychology and Education. Educational
Review, 16, 105-132.
Chris Green's quote is from the latter and is on page 124. The
volume for this journal is available on books.google.com and
be downloaded for free here:
http://books.google.com/books?id=FFEtAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA124&dq=%22educational+review%22++ganglion+cells+hieroglyphs&hl=en&sa=X&ei=79NGU9C3Iuy_sQTMnoGgCA&ved=0CDYQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22educational%20review%22%20%20ganglion%20cells%20hieroglyphs&f=false
Munsterberg had stirred up a hornet's nest earlier with the
following article:
Munsterberg, H (1898). The danger from experimental psychology.
The Atlantic Monthly, 81, 159-167,
James McKeen Cattell was one person who responded to the
Atlantic article (see his response at:
http://psycnet.apa.org/index.cfm?fa=buy.optionToBuy&id=2005-12819-004
)
and Munsterberg was mainly responding to Cattell and other
critics in "Psychology and Education" articles. One response
to Munsterberg's original article was by Charles Bliss and
I quote:
"Prof. Munsterberg has not realized the inspiration of the hour.
He misses the whole spirit of modern science and American
science teaching. He betrays a low ideal of what teaching should
be, and an almost intentional ignorance of schoolroom work. He
tells us we can't do this and we can't do that, when we are doing
these very things every day. (Bliss, 1898, p. 214; Cited by
Benjamin 2006)
Bliss reference:
Bliss, C. B. (1898, April). Professor Munsterberg's attack on
experimental psychology. Forum, 214-223.
For more on this incident, see Ludy Benjamin's article:
Benjamin Jr, L. T. (2006). Hugo Münsterberg's attack on the
application of
scientific psychology. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(2), 414-425.
Finally, after you get your kicks into Munsterberg, take a look at:
Spillmann, J., & Spillmann, L. (1993). The rise and fall of Hugo
Münsterberg.
Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 29(4), 322-338.
---
You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected].
To unsubscribe click here:
http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=36047
or send a blank email to
leave-36047-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
