Psychology (from Greek “psych”ť ”“ “the soul”ť, “logos”ť – studies, science) is science about evolution laws and psyche functioning as special form of vital activity. LivingÂ Â creatures co-operating with outward things takes a place with the help of psychical processes, acts, states. They so differ from physiological processes (aggregate of vital processes, acting in an organism and its organs) but also non-separable from them. Word psychology first appeared in the Western-Europe texts in 16th age.
The psychology development is closely related to development of philosophy, sciences about the most general nature laws, society and thought. The methodological base of psychology is knowledge about materialistic and idealistic directions in philosophy. Concepts “soul”ť and “psyche”ť are identical on their essence.
A concept “soul”ť belongs to the idealistic direction. The “soul”ť is examined as the phenomenon generated the special higher essence (God). A concept “psyche”ť belongs to materialistic direction. It is examined as a product of encephalon activity. Aristotle is considered as the founder of psychology as science. The first course of psychology “bout the soul”ť was written by him. Psychology, as science, was formed during many ages and it is not stable until now. There are not dogmas and constants in it. In time looks and objects changed to science about the soul. In my work I want to research some kinds of child behavior according to the most famous directions in psychology.
Nativism and empiricism
In XVII and XVIII ages in psychology two theories fought: Nativism and empiricism. Nativists asserted that there is a certain supply of innate ideas in the man soul. Empiricists, on the contrary, taught that there are no innate ideas and the man soul in the moment of birth presents so called “tabula rasa”ť- white sheet of paper which can be written down whatever knowledge and skills. To empirists belong: F. Bekon, T. Gobbs. Further development and direct application to principle psychology of empiric philosophy were got in John Locke’s works. Along with cognition feeling of the outer world Locke asserted as “an internal sense”ť or reflection, reflecting in our consciousness its own internal activity; it gives us “the internal unconscious perception that we exist”ť. To Nativists Iogann Muller (the German physiologist) belonged.
Locke formed the bases of new “empiric psychology”ť. On changing psychology as sciences there is “psychology without soul”ť about the consciousness phenomena directly in internal experience. This understanding determined the way of psychology up to XX century. From all Pleiads of English empirists exactly Locke had indisputably a most value directly for psychology. If we will look closely to Locke’s position, inevitably will come to startling at the first sight conclusion: in spite of the fact that Locke as empirist resists to Descartes’s rationalism, he gives an empiric variant essentially in the interpretation of internal experience as the article of psychology of all to that Descartes’s conception of consciousness. The definition of psychology internal experience is, according to Locke; internal experience is cognized by a reflection, reflection of our internal world in itself; this reflection gives us “internal infallible perception of the life”ť: such is Locke’s transcription of Descartes’s “cogito, ergo sum”ť (“I think it means I exist”ť). At the same time Locke essentially sets an introspection as specific way of psychological cognition and acknowledges its specific and besides by the “infallible”ť method of cognition of psyche. So within the framework of empiric psychology introspective conception of consciousness is set as the special internal world reserved in it and self-reflected.
Empiricists’ statement, that there is nothing innate in our soul, was wrong, but opinion of old school nativists that the supply of innate ideas in the man soul appears from age is unchanging. The newest psychological researches proved the existence of strain law in the space of spirit: each person’s psychical activity, as well as every animal individual, is the continuation of psychical activity of preceded generations row. We inherit from our ancestors not only the anatomic structure of their body and physiological organization, but also psychological features, because of psychical side of our creature is in close connection with its physiological structure. Psychological supervisions set circumstance that every man and animal has a number of views and instincts, inherited from ancestors.
That instinctive fear, which the chicken feels first seeing a kite, is not a result of individual experience, but result of preceding generations’ experience, setting an indissoluble association between imagination of large bird and threatening danger. Both animal and a man have a great number of such imaginations ”” instincts, and consequently, nativists are quite right that there are innate ideas. The error of nativists consisted only in that they imagined this supply of innate ideas as a permanent and unchanging size.
Question about whether theories of empiricism and nativism prove to be correct the explanation of the child’s development phenomena, was interested to one of Gestalt psychology founders K.Koffka. In his child’s development researches K. Koffka contested against K. Byuler vitalism and E.Torndayk mechanism. According to his opinion the internal conditions system in conjunction with the system of external conditions determines our conduct. Therefore development consists not only in ageing but also in studying.
Đš. Koffka considered that conduct would be fully described only when both its sides will be known, and only such description will allow to pass to conduct explanation. According to K. Koffka, it is necessary to study not only what a child does, its external conduct but also its internal world – the world of its emotional experience. This is the basic method of K. Koffka research, which is called psychophysical.
Children should be brought up, according to Rousseau, naturally, in accordance with the nature. It means that in education it is necessary to follow the nature of the child, to consider its age features. “The nature wishes that children were children before they become adults”ť, – wrote Rousseau. It considered, that education receives from three sources: by nature, from surrounding people and from things. Nature education, according to his the opinion, is carried out by “internal”ť development of human capabilities, development of sense-organs; education people is training of man to utilize development of these capabilities and organs; and finally, education from things is man’s own experience, acquired by him from things with which he faces with and which affect on him. Correct education will be when all of three factors (education nature, people, things or external circumstances) operate concertedly, in one direction.
In direct communication with natural education Rousseau has put also free education. First of natural human rights, it has declared, – freedom. Basing on this position he opposed scholastic school with its cramming, severe discipline, corporal punishments and suppression of the person of the child. It demanded to respect with the person of the child, to reckon with its interests and inquiries. There is positive value of its appeal to free education.
Rousseau gave the large value of educator guiding role, but he understood this role originally, in his own way.
Educator, he talked, only points the pupil on the decision of question, manages his interests so, that the child of it does not notice, renders indirect influence mainly. He organizes all of environment, all of the surrounding a child influencing so, that they prompt certain decisions.