Pluses and minuses of everyday scientific psychology. What is the difference between everyday psychological knowledge and scientific knowledge (five differences identified by Yu.B. Gippenreiter). Video lecture on everyday and scientific psychology
It is necessary to distinguish between scientific psychology and worldly psychology.
Everyday psychology is not a science, but simply views, ideas, beliefs and knowledge about the psyche, generalizing the everyday experience of people, as well as the life experience of each individual person. There are people who understand very well, feel the psyche of other people, see the peculiarities of their mental states. Such people can be called worldly psychologists.
Scientific and everyday psychology are not antagonists, they cooperate and complement each other. This is expressed in the fact that
The worldly and scientific psychologist are often the same person,
Everyday knowledge often serves as a starting point, the basis for the formation of scientific concepts and ideas,
And, conversely, scientific knowledge penetrates life, contributing to the solution of many life psychological problems.
|
Everyday psychology |
Scientific psychology |
|
Based on everyday experience, random observations. Knowledge is concentrated in worldly wisdom, in proverbs and sayings. Tolerant of contradictions. For example, these proverbs are contradictory: "Teaching is light, and not learning is darkness." "Live a century, learn a century - you will die a fool." The transfer of knowledge from teacher to student is difficult, almost impossible. |
Based on a scientific approach. Knowledge is concentrated in scientific concepts, laws, scientific theories. Strives to constructively resolve conflicts. The transfer of knowledge from teacher to student is possible if the student agrees to spend effort on the study of science. |
6. Typology of character. Character and behavior.
Attempts to construct a typology of characters have been repeatedly made throughout the history of psychology. One of the most famous and earliest of them was the one that, at the beginning of our century, was proposed by the German psychiatrist and psychologist E. Kretschmer. Somewhat later, a similar attempt was made by his American colleague W. Sheldon, and nowadays - E. Fromm, K. Leonhard, A.E. Lichko and a number of other scientists.
All typologies of human characters proceeded from a number of general ideas. The main ones are the following:
1. The character of a person is formed quite early in ontogeny and throughout the rest of his life manifests itself as more or less stable.
2. Those combinations of personality traits that are part of a person's character are not random. They form clearly distinguishable types that make it possible to identify and build a typology of characters.
Most of the people in accordance with this typology can be divided into groups.
E. Kretschmer identified and described the three most common types of body structure or human constitution: asthenic. athletic and picnic. He associated each of them with a special type of character (later it turned out that the author had no proper scientific grounds for this).
1. The asthenic type, according to Kretschmer, is characterized by a small thickness of the body in profile with an average or above average height. Asthenik is usually a thin and thin person, who, due to his thinness, seems to be somewhat taller than he really is. The asthenic has thin skin of the face and body, narrow shoulders, thin arms, an elongated and flat chest with underdeveloped muscles and weak fat accumulations. This is basically the characteristic of asthenic men. Women of this type, in addition, are often small.
2. The athletic type is characterized by a highly developed skeleton and muscles. Such a person is usually medium or tall, with broad shoulders, a powerful chest. He has a thick, high head.
3. The picnic type is distinguished by highly developed internal cavities of the body (head, chest, abdomen), a tendency to obesity with underdeveloped muscles and the musculoskeletal system. Such a man of average height with a short neck sitting between his shoulders.
The classification of character accentuations in adolescents, which was proposed by A. E. Lichko, is as follows:
1. Hyperthymic type. Adolescents of this type are distinguished by mobility, sociability, and a tendency to mischief. They always make a lot of noise in the events taking place around them, they love the restless companies of their peers. With good general abilities, they show restlessness, lack of discipline, and study unevenly. Their mood is always good and upbeat. With adults - parents and teachers - they often have conflicts. Such teenagers have many different hobbies, but these hobbies, as a rule, are superficial and pass quickly. Adolescents of the hyperthymic type often overestimate their abilities, are too self-confident, strive to show themselves (boast, impress others.
2. Cycloid type. It is characterized by increased irritability and a tendency to apathy. Teenagers of this type prefer to be at home alone, instead of going somewhere with their peers. They are hard going through even minor troubles, they react extremely irritably to comments. Their mood periodically changes from elated to depressed (hence the name of this type) with periods of about two to three weeks.
3. Labile type. This type is extremely changeable in mood, and it is often unpredictable. The reasons for an unexpected change in mood can be the most insignificant, for example, someone accidentally dropped a word, someone's unfriendly look. All of them "are capable of sinking into despondency and a gloomy mood in the absence of any serious troubles and failures." The behavior of these teenagers largely depends on the momentary mood. The present and the future, according to the mood, can be colored either with iridescent or gloomy colors. Such teenagers, being in a depressed mood, are in dire need of help and support from those who can improve their mood, who can distract, cheer up and entertain. They well understand and feel the attitude towards them of the people around them.
4. Asthenoneurotic type. This type is characterized by increased suspiciousness and capriciousness, fatigue and irritability. Especially often fatigue manifests itself when performing difficult mental work.
5. Sensitive type. He is characterized by increased sensitivity to everything: to what pleases, and to what upsets or frightens. These teenagers do not like big companies, too gambling, active mischievous games. They are usually shy and timid in front of strangers and therefore often give the impression of isolation. They are open and sociable only with those who are familiar to them; they prefer communication with children and adults to communication with peers. They are distinguished by obedience and show great affection for their parents. In adolescence, such adolescents may have difficulty adapting to the circle of peers, as well as an "inferiority complex". At the same time, a sense of duty is formed quite early in these same adolescents, and high moral demands are made on themselves and on those around them. What they lack in ability, they often make up for in challenging activities and increased diligence. These teenagers are choosy in finding friends and buddies for themselves, find great affection in friendship, adore friends who are older than them.
6. Psychasthenic type. Such adolescents are characterized by accelerated and early intellectual development, a tendency to reflection and reasoning, to introspection and evaluation of the behavior of other people. Such teenagers, however, are often stronger in words than in deeds. Their self-confidence is combined with indecision, and peremptory judgments are combined with hasty actions taken just at those moments when caution and prudence are required.
7. Schizoid type. The most essential feature of this type is isolation. These teenagers are not very attracted to their peers, they prefer to be alone, to be in the company of adults. They often demonstrate external indifference to the people around them, lack of interest in them, they poorly understand the state of other people, their experiences, they do not know how to sympathize. Them inner world often filled with various fantasies, some special hobbies. In the external manifestations of their feelings, they are quite restrained, not always understandable to others, especially to their peers, who, as a rule, do not like them very much.
8. Epileptoid type. These teenagers often cry, harass
surroundings, especially early childhood. Such children, writes A. E. Lichko, love to torture animals, tease the younger ones, and mock the helpless. In children's companies, they behave like dictators. Their typical features are cruelty, dominance, selfishness. In the group of children they control, such adolescents establish their own rigid, almost terrorist orders, and their personal power in such groups rests mainly on the voluntary obedience of other children or on fear. In the conditions of a tough disciplinary regime, they often feel at their best, try to please their superiors, achieve certain advantages over their peers, gain power, establish their dictate over others.
9. Hysteroid type. The main feature of this type is egocentrism, a thirst for constant attention to one's own person. Adolescents of this type often have a tendency to theatricality, posturing, and panache. Such children with great difficulty endure when in their presence someone praises their own comrade, when others are given more attention than themselves. For them, an urgent need is the desire to attract the attention of others, to listen to admiration and praise in their address. These adolescents are characterized by claims to an exclusive position among their peers, and in order to influence others, to attract their attention, they often act in groups as instigators and ringleaders. At the same time, being unable to become real leaders and organizers of the business, to gain informal authority for themselves, they often and quickly fail.
10. Unstable type. He is sometimes incorrectly characterized as weak-willed, going with the flow. Adolescents of this type show an increased inclination and craving for entertainment, and indiscriminately, as well as for idleness and idleness. They do not have any serious, including professional, interests, they almost do not think about their future at all.
11. Conformal type. This type demonstrates thoughtless, and often simply opportunistic submission to any authorities, to the majority in the group. Such teenagers are usually prone to moralizing and conservatism, and their main credo in life is "to be like everyone else." This is a type of opportunist who, for the sake of his own interests, is ready to betray a comrade, to leave him in difficult times, but no matter what he does, he will always find a "moral" justification for his act, and often not even one.
Close to the classifications of A. E. Lichko is the typology of characters proposed by the German scientist K. Leonhard. This classification is based on an assessment of the style of communication of a person with other people and represents the following types of characters as independent:
1. Hyperthymic type. He is characterized by extreme contact, talkativeness, expressiveness of gestures, facial expressions, pantomimes. He often spontaneously deviates from the original topic of conversation. Such a person has episodic conflicts with people around him due to insufficiently serious attitude to his official and family responsibilities. People of this type are often the initiators of conflicts themselves, but are upset if others make comments to them about this. Of the positive features that are attractive to communication partners, people of this type are characterized by vigor, a thirst for activity, optimism, and initiative. At the same time, they also have some repulsive features: frivolity, a tendency to immoral acts, increased irritability, projectionism, and an insufficiently serious attitude to their duties. They can hardly endure the conditions of strict discipline, monotonous activity, forced loneliness.
2. Disty type. He is characterized by low contact, taciturnity, and a dominant pessimistic mood. Such people are usually homebodies, burdened by a noisy society, rarely come into conflict with others, lead a secluded life. They highly value those who are friends with them, and are ready to obey them. They have the following personality traits that are attractive to communication partners: seriousness, conscientiousness, a heightened sense of justice. They also have repulsive features. This is passivity, slowness of thinking, slowness, individualism.
3. Cycloid type. He is characterized by fairly frequent periodic mood changes, as a result of which their manner of communicating with people around them also often changes. In a period of high mood, they are sociable, and in a period of depression, they are closed. During a spiritual upsurge, they behave like people with a hyperthymic character accentuation, and during a recession - with a distimic one.
4. Excitable type. This type is characterized by low contact in communication, slowness of verbal and non-verbal reactions. Often they are boring and gloomy, prone to rudeness and abuse, to conflicts in which they themselves are an active, provocative side. They are quarrelsome in the team, powerful in the family. In an emotionally calm state, people of this type are often conscientious, accurate, love animals and small children. However, in a state of emotional arousal, they are irritable, quick-tempered, and have poor control over their behavior.
5. Stuck type. He is characterized by moderate sociability, tediousness, a tendency to moralizing, and taciturnity. In conflicts, he usually acts as an initiator, an active party. He strives to achieve high performance in any business he undertakes, makes high demands on himself. Particularly sensitive to social justice, at the same time touchy, vulnerable, suspicious, vengeful. Sometimes overly arrogant, ambitious, jealous, makes exorbitant demands on relatives and subordinates at work.
6. Pedantic type. Rarely enters into conflicts, acting in them as a passive rather than an active side. In the service, he behaves like a bureaucrat, presenting many formal requirements to others. At the same time, he willingly concedes leadership to other people. Sometimes he harasses the household with excessive claims to accuracy. Its attractive features are: conscientiousness, accuracy, seriousness, reliability in business, and repulsive and conducive to the emergence of conflicts - formalism, tediousness, grumbling.
7. Alarm type. People of this type are characterized by low contact, timidity, self-doubt, and a minor mood. They rarely come into conflict with others, playing a mostly passive role in them. conflict situations looking for support and encouragement. Often they have the following attractive features: friendliness, self-criticism, diligence. Due to their defenselessness, they also often serve as "scapegoats", targets for jokes.
8. Emotive type. These people prefer communication in a narrow circle of the elite, with whom good contacts are established, whom they understand "perfectly". Rarely do they themselves enter into conflicts, playing a passive role in them. Grievances are in themselves, do not "splash out" outside. Attractive features: kindness, compassion, rejoicing in the successes of others, a heightened sense of duty, diligence. Repulsive features: excessive sensitivity, tearfulness.
9. Demonstrative type. This type of people is characterized by the ease of establishing contacts, the desire for leadership, the thirst for power and praise. He demonstrates high adaptability to people and at the same time a penchant for intrigue (with an outwardly soft manner of communication). Such people annoy those around them with self-confidence and high claims, systematically provoke conflicts themselves, but at the same time actively defend themselves. They have the following features that are attractive to communication partners: courtesy, artistry, the ability to captivate others, originality of thinking and actions. Their repulsive features: selfishness, hypocrisy, boasting, shirking work.
10. Exalted type. He is characterized by high contact, talkativeness, amorousness. Such people often argue, but do not bring matters to open conflicts. In conflict situations, they are both active and passive side. At the same time, they are attached and attentive to friends and relatives. They are altruistic, have a sense of compassion, good taste, show brightness and sincerity of feelings. Repulsive features: alarmism, susceptibility to momentary moods.
11. Extroverted type. It is distinguished by high contact, such people have a lot of friends, acquaintances, they are talkative to the point of talkativeness, open to any information. Rarely come into conflict with others and usually play a passive role in them. In communication with friends, at work and in the family, they often give up leadership to others, prefer to obey and be in the shadows. They have such attractive features as a willingness to listen carefully to another, to do what is asked, diligence. Repulsive features: susceptibility to influence, frivolity, thoughtlessness of actions, passion for entertainment, participation in the spread of gossip and rumors.
12. Introverted type. It, unlike the previous one, is characterized by very low contact, isolation, isolation from reality, and a tendency to philosophize. Such people love loneliness, rarely come into conflict with others, only when trying to unceremoniously interfere in their personal lives. Often they are emotionally cold idealists, relatively weakly attached to people. They have such attractive features as restraint, strong convictions, adherence to principles. They also have repulsive features. This is stubbornness, rigidity of thinking, stubborn upholding of one's ideas. They all have their own point of view, which may turn out to be erroneous, sharply different from the opinions of other people, and yet they continue to defend it no matter what. This classification refers mainly to adults and represents the typology of characters mainly in terms of attitude towards people. Summarizing the observational data on the social behavior of various people, correlating them with the practice of working in the clinic (E. Fromm was a Freudian psychiatrist), the author of the presented typology of characters deduced the following main types:
1. "Masochist-sadist". This is the type of person who tends to see the causes of his successes and failures in life, as well as the causes of observed social events, not in the circumstances, but in people. In an effort to eliminate these causes, he directs his aggression towards the person who seems to him to be the cause of failure. If it is about himself, then his aggressive actions are directed at himself; if other people act as a cause, then they become victims of his aggressiveness. Such a person is engaged in self-education, self-improvement, "remaking" people "for the better" a lot. With his persistent actions, exorbitant demands and claims, he sometimes brings himself and those around him to a state of exhaustion. This type is especially dangerous for others when he gains power over them: he begins to terrorize them, based on "good intentions."
Describing such people as a psychiatrist, E. Fromm wrote: "The most frequently manifested masochistic tendencies are a feeling of inferiority, helplessness, insignificance." Masochist people tend to belittle and weaken themselves, revel in self-criticism and self-flagellation, build upon themselves vain accusations, in everything and above all they try to take the blame on themselves, even if they had nothing to do with what happened.
E. Fromm's observation is interesting, arguing that in this type of people, along with masochistic inclinations, sadistic tendencies are almost always revealed. They manifest themselves in the desire to make people dependent on themselves, to acquire complete and unlimited power over them, to exploit them, to inflict pain and suffering on them, to enjoy the vision of how they suffer. This type of person is called an authoritarian person. E. Fromm showed that such personal qualities were inherent in many well-known despots in history, and included Hitler, Stalin, and a number of other famous historical figures in their number.
2. "Destroyer". It is characterized by pronounced aggressiveness and active, striving to eliminate, destroy the object that caused frustration, the collapse of hopes in this person. "Destructiveness," writes Fromm, "is a means of getting rid of an unbearable feeling of impotence." Destructiveness as a means of resolving their life problems is usually addressed by people who experience a sense of anxiety and powerlessness, are limited in the realization of their intellectual and emotional capabilities. During periods of great social upheavals, revolutions, upheavals, they act as the main force that destroys the old, including culture.
3. "Conformist-machine". Such an individual, faced with intractable social and personal life problems, ceases to "be himself." He unquestioningly submits to circumstances, society of any type, the requirements of a social group, quickly assimilating the type of thinking and mode of behavior that is characteristic of most people in a given situation. Such a person almost never has either his own opinion or a pronounced social position. He actually loses his own "I", his individuality, and is so accustomed to experiencing exactly those feelings that are expected of him in certain situations, that only as an exception he could notice something "alien" in his feelings. Such a person is always ready to submit to any new authority, quickly and without problems changes his beliefs, if circumstances require it, without particularly thinking about the moral side of such behavior. This is a type of conscious or unconscious opportunist.
The typology developed by E. Fromm is real in the sense of the word that it really resembles the behavior of many people during social events taking place in our country now or in the past.
Any science has as its basis some worldly, empirical experience of people. For example, physics relies on the Everyday life knowledge about the movement and fall of bodies, about friction and energy, about light, sound, heat and much more. Mathematics also proceeds from ideas about numbers, shapes, quantitative ratios, which begin to form already in preschool age.
But it is different with psychology. Each of us has a store of worldly psychological knowledge. There are even outstanding worldly psychologists. These are, of course, great writers, as well as some (though not all) representatives of professions that involve constant communication with people: teachers, doctors, clergymen, etc. But, I repeat, and a common person possesses certain psychological knowledge. This can be judged by the fact that each person to some extent can understand the other, influence his behavior, predict his actions, take into account his individual characteristics, help him, etc.
Let's think about the question: what is the difference between everyday psychological knowledge and scientific knowledge? I will give you five such differences.
First:
worldly psychological knowledge, concrete; they are dedicated to specific situations, specific people, specific tasks. They say waiters and taxi drivers are also good psychologists.
But in what sense, for what tasks? As we know, often - quite pragmatic. Also, the child solves specific pragmatic tasks by behaving in one way with his mother, in another way with his father, and again in a completely different way with his grandmother. In each case, he knows exactly how to behave in order to achieve the desired goal. But we can hardly expect from him the same insight in relation to other people's grandmothers or mothers. So, everyday psychological knowledge is characterized by concreteness, limitedness of tasks, situations and persons to which they apply.
Scientific psychology, like any science, strives for generalizations. To do this, she uses scientific concepts. The development of concepts is one of the most important functions of science. Scientific concepts reflect the most essential properties of objects and phenomena, general connections and correlations. Scientific concepts are clearly defined, correlated with each other, linked into laws.
For example, in physics, thanks to the introduction of the concept of force, I. Newton managed to describe thousands of different specific cases of motion and mechanical interaction of bodies using the three laws of mechanics. The same thing happens in psychology. You can describe a person for a very long time, listing in everyday terms his qualities, character traits, actions, relationships with other people.
Scientific psychology, on the other hand, seeks and finds such generalizing concepts that not only economize descriptions, but also allow one to see the general tendencies and patterns of personality development and its individual characteristics behind a conglomerate of particulars. One feature of scientific psychological concepts: they often coincide with everyday ones in their external form, that is, simply speaking, they are expressed in the same words. However, the inner content, the meanings of these words, as a rule, are different. Everyday terms are usually more vague and ambiguous.
Once, high school students were asked to answer the question in writing: what is a personality? The answers were very different, and one student answered: "This is what should be checked against the documents." I will not now talk about how the concept of "personality" is defined in scientific psychology - this is a complex issue, and we will deal with it specifically later, in one of the last lectures. I will only say that this definition is very different from the one proposed by the aforementioned schoolboy.
Second difference worldly psychological knowledge lies in the fact that they are intuitive. It's connected with in a special way obtaining them: they are acquired by practical trials and adjustments. This is especially true in children. I have already mentioned their good psychological intuition. And how is it achieved? Through daily and even hourly trials to which they subject adults and which the latter are not always aware of. And in the course of these tests, children discover who can be "twisted with ropes" and who cannot.
Often educators and coaches find effective ways upbringing, training, training, going the same way: experimenting and vigilantly noticing the slightest positive results, that is, in a certain sense, "groping". Often they turn to psychologists with a request to explain the psychological meaning of the techniques they have found.
In contrast, scientific psychological knowledge is rational and fully conscious. The usual way is to put forward verbally formulated hypotheses and test the consequences logically arising from them.
Third difference consists in the ways of transferring knowledge and even in the very possibility of transferring it. In the field practical psychology this possibility is very limited. This follows directly from the two previous features of worldly psychological experience - its concrete and intuitive character.
The deep psychologist F. M. Dostoevsky expressed his intuition in the works he wrote, we read them all - did we become equally insightful psychologists after that?
Is life experience passed on from the older generation to the younger? As a rule, with great difficulty and to a very small extent. The eternal problem of "fathers and sons" is precisely that children cannot and do not even want to adopt the experience of their fathers. Each new generation, each young person, has to "stuff his own bumps" in order to acquire this experience.
At the same time, in science, knowledge is accumulated and transferred with a high, so to speak, efficiency. Someone long ago compared representatives of science with pygmies who stand on the shoulders of giants - outstanding scientists of the past. They may be much smaller, but they see farther than the giants, because they stand on their shoulders. The accumulation and transfer of scientific knowledge is possible due to the fact that this knowledge is crystallized in concepts and laws. They are fixed in scientific literature and are transmitted using verbal means, i.e., speech and language, which, in fact, we have begun to do today.
Quadruple Difference consists in methods of obtaining knowledge in the fields of everyday and scientific psychology. In worldly psychology, we are forced to confine ourselves to observations and reflections. In scientific psychology, experiment is added to these methods. essence experimental method consists in the fact that the researcher does not wait for a confluence of circumstances, as a result of which the phenomenon of interest to him arises, but causes this phenomenon himself, creating the appropriate conditions.
Then he purposefully varies these conditions in order to reveal the patterns that this phenomenon obeys. With the introduction of the experimental method into psychology (the discovery of the first experimental laboratory at the end of the last century), psychology, as I have already said, took shape as an independent science.
Finally, fifth distinction, and at the same time, the advantage of scientific psychology lies in the fact that it has at its disposal extensive, varied and sometimes unique factual material, inaccessible in its entirety to any bearer of everyday psychology. This material is accumulated and comprehended, including in special branches of psychological science, such as developmental psychology, pedagogical psychology, patho- and neuropsychology, labor psychology and engineering psychology, social Psychology, zoopsychology, etc.
In these areas, dealing with different stages and levels mental development animals and humans, with defects and diseases of the psyche, with unusual working conditions - conditions of stress, information overload or, conversely, monotony and information hunger, etc. - the psychologist not only expands the range of his research tasks, but also faces new unexpected phenomena. After all, consideration of the work of any mechanism in the conditions of development, breakdown or functional overload from different angles highlights its structure and organization.
I'll give you a short example. Of course, you know that in Zagorsk we have a special boarding school for deaf-blind-mute children. These are children who have no hearing, no vision, no sight, and of course, initially no speech. The main "channel" through which they can make contact with the outside world is touch.
And through this extremely narrow channel in conditions special education they begin to know the world, people and themselves! This process, especially at the beginning, goes very slowly, it unfolds in time and in many details can be seen as if through a "time lens" (the term used to describe this phenomenon by the famous Soviet scientists A.I. Meshcheryakov and E.V. Ilyenkov).
Obviously, in the case of the development of a normal healthy child, much passes too quickly, spontaneously and unnoticed. Thus, helping children in conditions cruel experiment, which nature has placed over them, the help organized by psychologists together with defectologists turns simultaneously into the most important means of knowing general psychological patterns - the development of perception, thinking, and personality.
So, summarizing, we can say that the development of special branches of psychology is a Method (method with a capital letter) general psychology. Of course, worldly psychology lacks such a method.
Now that we have become convinced of a number of advantages of scientific psychology over everyday psychology, it is appropriate to raise the question: what position should scientific psychologists take in relation to the bearers of everyday psychology? Suppose you graduated from the university, became educated psychologists. Imagine yourself in this state. Now imagine some sage next to you, not necessarily living today, some ancient Greek philosopher, for example.
This sage is the bearer of centuries-old reflections of people about the fate of mankind, about the nature of man, his problems, his happiness. You are the bearer of scientific experience, qualitatively different, as we have just seen. So what position should you take in relation to the knowledge and experience of the sage? This question is not idle, it will inevitably arise sooner or later before each of you: how should these two kinds of experience be related in your head, in your soul, in your activity?
I would like to warn you about one erroneous position, which, however, is often taken by psychologists with great scientific experience. “The problems of human life,” they say, “no, I don’t deal with them. I do scientific psychology. I understand neurons, reflexes, mental processes, and not in the "throes of creativity."
Does this position have any basis? Now we can already answer this question: yes, it does. These certain grounds consist in the fact that the mentioned scientific psychologist was compelled in the process of his education to take a step into the world of abstract general concepts, he was forced, together with scientific psychology, figuratively speaking, to drive life in vitro * "to tear apart" spiritual life "to pieces".
But these necessary actions made too much impression on him. He forgot the purpose for which these necessary steps were taken, what path was envisaged further. He forgot or did not take the trouble to realize that the great scientists - his predecessors introduced new concepts and theories, highlighting the essential aspects real life, suggesting then to return to its analysis with new means.
The history of science, including psychology, knows many examples of how a scientist saw the big and vital in the small and abstract. When I. V. Pavlov first registered the conditioned reflex separation of saliva in a dog, he declared that through these drops we would eventually penetrate into the pangs of human consciousness. The outstanding Soviet psychologist L. S. Vygotsky saw in "curious" actions such as tying a knot as a memento as a way for a person to master his behavior.
On how to see a reflection in small facts general principles and how to move from general principles to real life problems, you will not read anywhere. You can develop these abilities in yourself by absorbing the best examples contained in the scientific literature. Only constant attention to such transitions, constant exercise in them, can give you a sense of the "pulse of life" in scientific studies. Well, for this, of course, it is absolutely necessary to have worldly psychological knowledge, perhaps more extensive and deep.
Respect and attention to worldly experience, its knowledge will warn you against another danger. The fact is that, as you know, in science it is impossible to answer one question without ten new ones. But new questions are different: "bad" and correct. And it's not just words. In science, there have been and still are, of course, whole areas that have come to a standstill. However, before they finally ceased to exist, they worked idle for some time, answering "bad" questions that gave rise to dozens of other bad questions.
The development of science is reminiscent of moving through a complex labyrinth with many dead-end passages. To choose the right path, one must have, as is often said, good intuition, and it arises only through close contact with life. Ultimately, my idea is simple: a scientific psychologist must be at the same time a good worldly psychologist. Otherwise, he will not only be of little use to science, but will not find himself in his profession, simply speaking, he will be unhappy. I would like to save you from this fate.
One professor said that if his students mastered one or two main ideas in the entire course, he would consider his task completed. My desire is less modest: I would like you to learn one idea already in this one lecture. This thought is as follows: the relationship between scientific and worldly psychology is similar to the relationship between Antaeus and the Earth; the first, touching the second, draws its strength from it.
So, scientific psychology, firstly, is based on everyday psychological experience; secondly, it extracts its tasks from it; finally, thirdly, at the last stage it is checked.
excerpts from the book Gippenreiter Yu.B. "Introduction to General Psychology"
Everyday knowledge and experience form a basis for scientific psychology. It is on the basis of it that various scientific problems arise, which are subsequently verified experimentally.
The main difference between worldly and scientific psychology lies in the specifics and quality of knowledge. Life experience is more specific and narrowly applicable. It is often based on an intuitive understanding of the situation. Often it is built on the soil of a not very high cultural level.
Such knowledge can be made up of chaotic, scattered observations, unexpected guesses and conjectures. They reflect certain fashion trends, moods, fears and rumors, so they can be irrational and even negative.
Scientific knowledge is a well-thought-out, meaningful system of facts and professional observations and notes. Their reliability is confirmed by numerous experiments.
What is life psychology
Conventionally, every person is a psychologist. The quality of his life will depend on how competently and skillfully he is able to analyze the personalities of other people, influence them and build relationships with them.
Everyday psychology is represented by a combination of different views, beliefs, beliefs, proverbs, aphorisms, sayings and similar creations of the people. Thus, it keeps the experience of generations.
Our idea of reality, current life, people arises from our own experience and knowledge that someone shared with us. It should be borne in mind that our perception of reality cannot cover all its completeness and versatility. Our own views, beliefs and opinions limit us to certain limits. We're looking at the world, as if through a small window, while worldly psychology gives us richer grounds for understanding. However, one should not forget the fact that worldly psychology is situational.
It should also be taken into account that the experience of each person is valuable precisely because it takes into account all the subtleties and nuances of the current situation for the microcosm of the one who then broadcasts his own impressions and conclusions. Therefore, it will prove to be more useful.
The importance of worldly knowledge should also not be underestimated. They help us make the most optimal decisions for us in everyday life, save us from annoying mistakes and allow us to achieve maximum benefits. Therefore, everyday experience is priceless for a person. If he does not listen to him, he will learn at the cost of his own losses and losses.
What do these aspects of understanding reality oppose to each other?
So, let's consider some characteristics of these spheres of knowledge, which are often located at directly opposite poles.
Generalization - specificity
Everyday knowledge is tied to a specific situation, specific tasks and people. For example, taxi drivers and waiters are usually well versed in people, but often their knowledge is limited only to their circle. professional activity. For example, children know perfectly well how to get what they want from home. However, outside of their family, their ability to control others loses its power.
Scientific psychology seeks to generalize and systematize the available information. She tries to highlight some fundamental reasons for creating a complete, clear explanatory scheme.
Thoughtfulness - intuition
Everyday experience arises on the basis of situations lived or noticed by others. It is formed through trial and error, spontaneously and rarely subjected to rational comprehension. For example, the ability to understand the psychology of the behavior of relatives in children develops gradually. Every day they observe how an adult reacts under certain circumstances. Thus, they know their households very well.
However, they cannot verbally express all their knowledge, the same applies to adults. It is very difficult to put into words what we understand, but on some sensual, subconscious level.
cultural layer
Cultural aspect scientific knowledge, as a rule, an order of magnitude higher than everyday understanding. Everyday knowledge in some cases even resembles a kind of superstition. They lack any evidence base.
Certainty, responsibility - negative, irresponsibility
Many worldly beliefs are devoid of a positive note:
- morning is not good;
- Monday is not an easy day;
- all diseases are from the nerves and so on.
Psychologists try to use precise formulations that do not reflect the subjective, emotional assessments of the observer himself. Others are presented with information reflecting dry, logical data and facts, and not given their own perception of what is happening. Although everyday formulations can also carry a deep meaning, you only need to be able to reveal it.
Verification methods
Everyday knowledge proves its validity only over time, and what loses its relevance is gradually forgotten. In addition, their correctness is confirmed by personal experience, and not by scientifically regulated experiments.
In science, the researcher purposefully models the necessary conditions rather than waiting for favorable circumstances. This makes it possible to study in its entirety the phenomenon of interest by changing the characteristics of the experimental environment.
Due to the fact that scientific knowledge is accumulated and systematized, information about a particular object or phenomenon becomes complex and diverse. The resulting material continues to be comprehended and analyzed, becoming fertile ground for its expansion and the emergence of new scientific disciplines.
General psychology develops due to the improvement and enrichment of its individual branches. Worldly knowledge has no unified system and such a feature.
The position of the psychologist in relation to worldly knowledge
Scientific research often resembles the movement of a blind kitten through a maze. Often a seemingly progressive line of thought turns out to be erroneous. However, one's own flair and intuition often helps to make those very grandiose, revolutionary steps. You should not break away from the current reality, mired in dry scientific facts and dogmas.
Dear blog readers, what do you think about everyday psychology and how it differs from scientific. Leave feedback or comments below. Someone will find this very useful!
The psychological knowledge accumulated and used by a person in everyday life is called "everyday psychology". They are usually specific and are formed in a person in the course of his life as a result of observations, self-observations and reflections.
The credibility of worldly psychology is tested on personal experience and experience of people with whom a person directly comes into contact. This knowledge is passed from mouth to mouth, recorded, reflecting centuries of everyday experience. Rich psychological experience is accumulated in fairy tales. Many everyday observations are collected by writers and reflected in works of art or in the genre of moral aphorisms. Everyday observations prominent people, by virtue of their wisdom and ability to generalize, are also of great value.
The main criterion for the truth of knowledge of everyday psychology- their plausibility and obvious usefulness in everyday life situations.
The peculiarities of this knowledge are concreteness and practicality. Fragmentation is characteristic of everyday psychological knowledge. Such knowledge is intuitive. They are characterized by the availability of presentation and clarity. In knowledge of this type, the inaccuracy of the concepts used is manifested. Knowledge of everyday psychology is characterized by reliance on life experience and common sense.
Everyday psychology contains both life wisdom and a large number of near-psychological prejudices.
Yu.B. Gippenreiter identifies the following such differences between scientific and everyday psychology:
1. Everyday knowledge is specific, related to specific life situations, and scientific psychology strives for generalized knowledge based on the identification general patterns life and behavior of people.
2. Everyday knowledge is more intuitive, and in psychological science strive for a rational explanation of mental phenomena, that is, for their better understanding and even forecasting.
3. Everyday knowledge is transmitted in very limited ways (by word of mouth, through letters, etc.), while scientific knowledge is transmitted through a special system for fixing accumulated experience (through books, lectures, accumulated in scientific schools, etc.) .
4. In everyday psychology, the acquisition of knowledge is carried out through observation, reasoning, or through the direct experience of certain events by a person. In scientific psychology, new knowledge is also obtained in special studies and experiments, as well as in special forms of scientific thinking and imagination (what is called an "imaginary experiment").
5. Scientific psychology has extensive, varied and unique factual material that is inaccessible to any bearer of everyday psychology. A special characteristic of scientific knowledge is its consistency and orderliness, which allows every professional psychologist to navigate in all the diversity of this knowledge.
But at the same time, as Yu. B. Gippenreiter notes, one cannot say that scientific psychology is necessarily “better” than everyday psychology, since in fact they complement each other.
In everyday life, we often use the words "psychology", "psychologist", "psychological", not always thinking about their meaning. "This person is a good psychologist," we say about someone who knows how to establish and maintain contacts with people. “He has such a psychology,” we explain the interests, inclinations and actions of a person or characterize the features of his personality. Sometimes you can hear a phrase like "Well, he's crazy!", Meaning the emotional characteristics of another person as inferior or sick.
Psychological knowledge accumulated and used by a person in everyday life is called worldly psychology. They are usually specific and are formed in a person in the course of his life as a result of observations, self-observations and reflections.
The reliability of worldly psychology is being tested on personal experience. A person applies this knowledge in interaction with other people. The need to coordinate one's actions with the actions of another, to understand not only the words, but also the context of the utterance, to "read" in the behavior and appearance of another person's intentions and moods, prompts one to single out and fix the multifaceted manifestations of one's inner life.
A person tries to explain this or that act of another by the peculiarities of his inner world. To do this, different actions of another person are compared and conclusions are drawn about the typical properties of his soul. Thus, everyday psychology moves from observation and an attempt to explain a specific act to a generalized understanding of a person. The desire to better understand the inner world of people encourages to compare their actions with each other and come to general conclusions. In essence, everyday psychology is a generalization of everyday psychological knowledge.
Of course, people differ in terms of psychological vigilance and worldly wisdom. Some are very perceptive, capable of easily capturing the mood, intentions or character traits of a person through the expression of the eyes, face, gestures, posture, movements, habits. Others do not have such abilities, are less sensitive to understanding the behavior, the internal state of another person. Moreover, life experience is far from being such an important factor here. It has been noted that there is no strong relationship between psychological insight and a person's age: there are children who are well versed in the psychological qualities of other people, and there are adults who do not understand people's internal states well.
The source of everyday psychology is not only a person's own experience, but also the people with whom he directly comes into contact. The content of worldly psychology embodied in folk rituals, traditions, beliefs, proverbs and sayings, aphorisms of folk wisdom, fairy tales and songs. This knowledge is passed from mouth to mouth, recorded, reflecting centuries of everyday experience. Many proverbs and sayings have a direct or indirect psychological content: “There are devils in the still waters”, “Softly spreads, but hard to sleep”, “A frightened crow and a bush is afraid”, “Praise, honor and glory and a fool loves”, “Seven times measure - cut once", "Repetition is the mother of learning".
Rich psychological experience is accumulated in fairy tales. In many of them, the same heroes act: Ivan the Fool, Vasilisa the Beautiful, Baba Yaga, Kashchei the Immortal - in fairy tales; Bear, Wolf, Fox, Hare - in fairy tales about animals. Fairy tale characters often characterize certain psychological types and characters of people encountered in life.
Many worldly observations collected by writers and reflected in works of art or in the genre of moral aphorisms. Widely known are the collections of aphorisms that M. Montaigne, F. La Rochefoucauld, J. La Bruyère compiled in their time.
Historical digression
Michel de Montaigne(1533-1592) - French writer, political figure, philosopher. Among the most famous works is the book of essays "Experiments" (1580-1588). He lived in difficult times - Bartholomew night, plague epidemic, religious wars. However, his philosophy is alive, real, clear and life-affirming.
François de La Rochefoucauld(1613-1680) - French writer and moralist. In an aphoristic form, he outlined philosophical observations on the nature of the human character. La Rochefoucauld wanted to help a person "know himself" and considered it the greatest feat of friendship to open a friend's eyes to his own shortcomings.
Jean de La Bruyère(1645-1696) French moralist. In 1688, the first edition of the book "Characters, or Morals of the Present Age" was published. During the life of the author, it was officially reprinted nine times (1889 - the first Russian translation).
Task for reflection
Explain in your own words what kind of psychological wisdom the following aphorisms of Montaigne, La Rochefoucauld, La Bruyère express. Give examples of everyday observations or situations in which these aphorisms are confirmed.
- Cm.: Slobodchikov V.I., Isaev E.I. Fundamentals of Psychological Anthropology // Human Psychology: An Introduction to the Psychology of Subjectivity: textbook, manual for universities. M. : PI Cola-Press, 1995. S. 39.
