The emergence of understanding brain function and the influence of hereditary
Two important influences emerged in the late 19th century and they are the emergence of understanding brain function and the influence of hereditary. Francis Galton described human intelligence as being associated with social stature. For instance, it was thought someone with a family background of royalty, science, and medicine would breed more persons of genius than an individual of lower social status. Galton's ideas were in part developed due to his cousin's work on understanding evolution. That cousin was none other than Charles Darwin. Psychology as a science was just beginning at this time with little unification on not only understanding behavior but how to even go about studying it.
Explain the rationale behind Galton's ideas regarding heredity. From current understandings of hereditary traits, genetics and human behavior explain the major issues regarding Galton's work.
Why did the ideas of Darwin and others like him have a prominent influence on psychology at the time? Explain the strengths and weaknesses of evolution and natural selection with regard to social theory and psychology.
What were the differences and similarities between Wundt and Titchener’s structuralism and Act psychology? Explain why the psychology of Wundt, and especially Titchener, did not last.
Comment on the postings of at least two peers.
Sample Solution
Rationale for Galton's Ideas:
Francis Galton believed in the hereditary nature of intelligence based on several observations:
- Social Status and "Genius": He noticed a higher prevalence of accomplished individuals (geniuses) among families of high social standing (royalty, scientists, doctors). This led him to believe these families possessed genes for intelligence that were passed down through generations.
- Darwin's Influence: Charles Darwin, Galton's cousin, proposed evolution through natural selection. Galton applied this concept to human intelligence, suggesting intelligence could be a "selected" trait passed on through breeding.
Full Answer Section
Issues with Galton's Work: Our understanding of genetics and human behavior exposes the flaws in Galton's ideas:- Oversimplification of Intelligence: Intelligence is a complex trait influenced by multiple genes and environmental factors. Galton's theory focused solely on heredity.
- Social Bias: Galton's observations were limited to a specific social class. He didn't consider the impact of social mobility and unequal access to education on perceived intelligence.
- Scientific Explanation for Behavior: Darwin offered a scientific basis for understanding behavior, suggesting behaviors with survival benefits would be passed down through generations.
- Focus on Adaptation: The idea of adapting to the environment resonated with early psychologists studying how humans and animals learn and adjust their behavior.
- Focuses on the biological basis of behavior.
- Explains why certain behaviors persist across generations.
- Highlights the adaptive nature of behavior.
- Oversimplifies complex social interactions.
- Doesn't fully account for the role of culture and learning.
- May justify social inequalities based on a "survival of the fittest" mentality.
- Both were part of structuralism, focusing on breaking down mental processes to their basic elements.
- Used introspection (self-observation) to study the mind.
- Focus: Wundt studied basic conscious experiences, while Titchener emphasized analyzing the structure of mental processes.
- Methodology: Titchener employed stricter methods and controlled experiments compared to Wundt's broader approach.
- Introspection's Subjectivity: Relying solely on self-observation made findings difficult to replicate and verify.
- Limited Scope: Structuralism couldn't adequately explain complex behaviors like memory and motivation.
- Did your peers discuss the ethical implications of Galton's ideas on eugenics?
- How did others address the limitations of Darwinian explanations in social psychology?
- Did any posts discuss alternative approaches to studying the mind that emerged after structuralism's decline?