Crossing Paths Variously

There are different ways of studying the same thing. As a continued deliberation on the value of different frameworks and phases of analyses, today, I'm going to introduce insights from the book Psychotherapy by Hugo Münsterberg (1863-1916) originally published in 1909 (Münsterberg, 1909). Visiting old readings in any field can be informative. The core themes we grapple with today have often been voiced by older minds as well, only with the difference of the kind of knowledgebase found at the time. When traced with new knowledges in mind, it's a mind-treat. You get a better appreciation for how some ideas and ways of thought were initially expressed. In the book Psychotherapy, Münsterberg explains how in understanding human beings and their inner life, different knowledges may exist.

In psychology, this idea was later reflected in

-the different areas or perspectives in psychology (e.g., clinical, social, and so forth),

-the distinction between emotion, thought, and behavior,

-the therapeutically valued ABC of human experience (affect, behavior, and consequences),

-and knowledge accessible consciously versus knowledge outside awareness.

A recognition of possible different frameworks of analyses has always been useful in saving time and letting go of particular disagreements in a way that leaves everyone understood. Why? Because sometimes the difference in views may be due to one person focusing on the 'purposive view of man' which involves noticing patterns and intentions, another person focusing on the causality of outcomes. As an example, a psychologist may be interested in the causality of the most heinous crime, while a historian would be more interested in the qualities of the persons and significant building of events that may have triggered the final cause, giving a more nuanced, grey-shaded understanding about events (Münsterberg, 1909). Though not a final solution to disagreements, Münsterberg states, how this 'purposive understanding' of our intentions can establish the premise for understanding causality (Münsterberg, 1909).

Another way in which the above issue becomes apparent is when people don't realize how they aren't disagreeing at all but simply talking about different phases or subjective interpretations of the same psychological experience. In memory research, this happens frequently. Similarly, in emotional experience, two people may be feeling the same emotion but never in the same subjective way, as noted in this original explanation. This matters because of implications for the behavior expressed (e.g., differences in the intensity of emotion may mean different consequences, decisions, or behavioral actions over time).

William James' functional stance brought some reconciliation to these distinct stages of thought when he emphasized how all behavior is eventually adaptive, and most importantly continuously evolving (James, 1890). Seen closely, he was basically stating how recognizing the precursors of behavior, the conditions of the individual, their given knowledge at the time, and expectations sought in future is what takes us in the direction of adaptive behavior. For his reason, the causal and necessary connections deemed certain in the physical world may not have any meaning in psychological experience because intentions happen in continuous moments and don't last as separate 'psychic objects' (Münsterberg, 1909). Put differently, with a good purposive understanding, we are able to have a more reasonable life-saving response if not necessarily an accurate one, which is what is required for success here. Feelings, will, character strengths, and motivation form our personality over time encouraged experientially depending on how expression of these facets enabled good survival for us most of the time. This matters in understanding the choices made by different individuals without having to take sides or only choosing one kind of information.

In sum, appreciating complexity is important, if the message of the aforementioned book was stated in one sentence. Knowing stories and conditions of individuals gives us a clearer understanding of why later behaviors may have occurred. It doesn't justify all decisions or actions, only enables a more humane complete understanding. To illustrate the importance of different knowledges, the author says (paraphrased) how not knowing so will be the same as damaging the nerves and vessels, unknowingly, if a person knew that only the limbs exist.

An old Indian parable called The Elephant and the Blind Men makes the above clear for all.

References

James, W. (1890). The principles of psychology. Henry Holt and Company.

Münsterberg, H. (1909). Psychotherapy. Moffat, Yard.