Here is a link to a modern Eugenics website with several articles and even a photo gallery with pictures of our friend Rushton! I was surprised that there was still interest in eugenics today so I wanted to learn more about it.
http://www.eugenics.net/
Of all the psychologists we read and learned about this past week, James was the one that resonated with me the most. I am very intrigued by the fact that began as a painter and had a promising career as an artist, but sadly gave it up. I tried looking for pictures of his artwork online, but haven't been able to find any. However, I did find a book in the library that has a few photos of his art in it, which I will try to remember to bring into class on Tuesday. I liked David E. Leary's analysis of James's psychological theories and how they were influenced by his experience with art. I think this gave him a unique perspective of the field of psychology and human consciousness. I think his art background also allowed James to be one the more open-minded or grandly philosophical of his peers and colleagues. While positvist Cattell was occupied with gathering facts and Hall was busy organizing the new field, James sought to understand the "big" questions. Not satisfied being confined to a labratory, where presumably James knew that the nature of human experience and the entirety of human conscious could not be known. I believe that it is James's intricate, grandiose theory that has sustained psychology through the generations and inspired latter work. It seems that the field needed a grand vision from someone who thought outside the "psychology box" to really become its own domain, one that would truly further the understanding of our own humanity.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment