Wittgenstein on K?hler and Gestalt psychology: a critique.

Wittgenstein's objections to K?hler and gestalt psychology are critically examined. Principal features of K?hler's Gestalt Psychology are discussed that are relevant to Wittgenstein's views. They include K?hler's concepts of "subjective" and "objective" experiences, "sensory organization," and "empiristic theory." Wittgenstein's objections, which focus on the concept of sensory organization, are examined. Wittgenstein employs the term "aspect," which is derived from the findings of gestalt psychology, as a replacement for K?hler's term "sensory organization." After tracing his uses of aspect, it is shown that aspect is a superordinate entity distinct from 'sensory content' (colors and shapes). This dualism of aspect and sensory content is of the same kind that prevailed in the empiristic theory of visual perception. Wittgenstein's adherence to the empiristic theory is discussed. Finally, the difference between Wittgenstein's aspect and K?hler's sensory organization is examined.     

De „Gestalt”-theorie van Köhler

Ohne Zusammenfassung     

Wolfgang Köhler and Gestalt theory: an English translation of Köhler's Introduction to die physischen Gestalten for Philosophers and Biologists

This article presents an English translation (from the German) of one of gestalt psychology's most significant documents, first published in 1920 in Wolfgang Kohler's Die physischen Gestalten in Ruhe und im stationdren Zustand (The Physical Gestalten at Rest and in a Stationary State). The book it introduces both embodies Kohler's extension of gestalt theory into new domains and did much to ensure the broad impact of these ideas and approaches. This introduction itself well illustrates Kohler's own thought processes both as his ideas emerged and as he sought to convince his readers of their value. Despite the fact that they are more than 70 years old, Kohler's words have many implications for late 20th century discussions of the relationships among psychology, physiology, and physics.     

Pavlovvs. Köhler

During the 1920s, I. P. Pavlov’s scholarly interests broadened to consider problem-solving. Distrusting Wolfgang Köhler’s Gestalt explanation of the problemsolving process and its interspecies aspects, Pavlov performed, from 1933 to 1936, a number of experiments, including a replication of Köhler’s building experiment, using chimpanzees as subjects. Confirming Köhler’s findings, Pavlov explained the problemsolving process in terms of unconditional reflexes and the establishment, by Pavlovian conditioning and the Thorndikian method of trial and error, of temporary neural connections identical, on the psychological level, to associations. In contrast to Köhler’s “structural” explanation, Pavlov emphasized the processes of analysis and synthesis. According to Pavlov insight is achieved progressively—as the result of the organism’s problem-solving behavior—contradicting Köhler’s thesis of a sudden subjective reorganization of the environmental situation. Pavlov explained interspecies differences among higher organisms in terms of the range of a species behavior, with the second signal system as the main distinguishing characteristic between human and nonhuman species.     

Motivation gains in performance groups: paradigmatic and theoretical developments on the Köhler effect

In contrast to many demonstrations of social loafing, relatively few studies have documented group motivation gains. One such exception was O. K?hler's (1926, 1927) finding that team members working together did better at a taxing persistence task than would be expected from their individual performances, particularly when there was a moderate discrepancy in coworkers' capabilities. In Experiment 1, we developed a paradigm within which K?hler's overall motivation gain effect could be replicated, although the discrepancy in coworkers' capabilities did not moderate these motivation gains (after statistical artifacts were taken into account). Experiment 2 indicated that this motivation gain occurred under conjunctive but not under additive task demands, suggesting that the instrumentality of one's contribution to valued outcomes is a more likely explanation of the K?hler effect than social comparison processes.     

Psychological mechanisms underlying the Köhler motivation gain

Sometimes group work conditions lead to motivation gains rather than to social loafing. Two theoretical explanations for the K?hler motivation gain effect are identified, one stressing social comparison and a second stressing the indispensability of one's effort to the group. The results of three new experiments are reported. Experiment 1 suggested that both explanations are valid and contribute to the K?hler effect. Prior studies suggested that there might be gender differences in the relative importance of these two explanatory processes. Experiment 2 confirmed this suggestion. In Experiment 3, the gender difference was eliminated by priming women with a goal (viz., competition) presumed to be chronically more important to men. It is argued that the relative importance of these two motivational processes will depend on the immediate and chronic importance attached to more personal (viz., to achieve a favorable social comparison) versus collective (viz., to contribute to one's group) goals.     

To and from philosophy — Discussions with Gödel and Wittgenstein

I propose to sketch my views on several aspects of the philosophy of mathematics that I take to be especially relevant to philosophy as a whole. The relevance of my discussion would, I think, become more evident, if the reader keeps in mind the function of (the philosophy of) mathematics in philosophy in providing us with more transparent aspects of general issues. I shall consider: (1) three familiar examples; (2) logic and our conceptual frame; (3) communal agreement and objective certainty; (4) the transcommunal universality of mathematics; (5) the big jump to the potential infinite; (6) the reconciliation of local creation with the hypothesis of discovery; (7) Platonism as realism plus conceptualism; (8) foundational studies and mathematical practice; and (9) the decomposition of philosophical disagreements. The views of Gödel and Wittgenstein are emphasized in order to add specificity to the discussions.     

Wittgenstein on Verification and Seeing-As, 1930–1932

This article examines the little-explored remarks on verification in Wittgenstein's notebooks during the period between 1930 and 1932. In these remarks, Wittgenstein connects a verificationist theory of meaning with the notion of logical multiplicity, understood as a space of possibilities: a proposition is verified by a fact if and only if the proposition and the fact have the same logical multiplicity. But while in his early philosophy logical multiplicities were analysed as an outcome of the formal properties of simple objects and simple signs, Wittgenstein in the early 1930s connects the notion of logical multiplicity with the notion of ways of seeing. I will argue that the relevant ways of seeing are closely similar to seeing-as or aspect seeing. According to Wittgenstein's view in the early 1930s, logical multiplicities are part of our perceptual experience of propositions and facts. In this sense, the verification relation depends on how we experience propositions and facts as being surrounded by a logical space of possibilities. Strikingly, Wittgenstein's way of thinking about the verification relation offers solutions to a set of seemingly intractable problems connected with the versions of verificationism developed by members of the Vienna Circle.     

Wundt,Völkerpsychologie,and experimental social psychology

Wilhelm Wundt distinguished between "experimental psychology" and Volkerpsychologie. It is often claimed that Wundt maintained that social psychological phenomena, the subject matter of V?lkerpsychologie, could not be investigated experimentally but must be explored via comparative-historical methods. In this article it is argued that it is doubtful if many of the passages usually cited as evidence that Wundt held such a view actually such such a view. It is also argued that if Wundt did hold such a view, it was inconsistent with his own general theoretical position and methodological practice. It is suggested that it is anachronistic to attribute such a view to Wundt, because he appears to have had little interest in the experimental analysis of the synchronic social dynamics of psychological processes. Most of Wundt's arguments about the inappropriateness of experimentation were directed against the introspective analysis of diachronic historical processes.     

Nonsense on Stilts? Wittgenstein,Ethics, and the Lives of Animals

Wittgenstein is often invoked in philosophical disputes over the ethical justifiability of our treatment of animals. Many protagonists believe that Wittgenstein's philosophy points to a quantum difference between human and animal nature that arises out of humans' linguistic capacity. For this reason – its alleged anthropocentrism – animal liberationists tend to dismiss Wittgenstein's philosophy, whereas, for the same reason, anti‐liberationists tend to embrace it. I endorse liberationist moral claims, but think that many on both sides of the dispute fail to grasp the import of Wittgenstein's philosophy. My argument proceeds through close engagement with Michael Leahy's Against Liberation, which makes extensive use of Wittgenstein's ‘notion of language‐games’ as an ‘essential methodological aid’ in its defence and justification of the moral status quo. Leahy's understanding and application of that method exemplifies an entrenched interpretative stance in the wider Wittgensteinian scholarship which I seek to counter. This enables me to show that far from entailing conservatism, as some of his critics and followers contend, Wittgenstein's philosophical method is just as conducive to radical moral and political critique as it is to any other normative position.     

Recent work on Wittgenstein, 1980–1990

While Wittgenstein wrote unconventionally and denied that he was advancing philosophical theses, most of his interpreters have attributed conventional philosophical theses to him. But the best recent interpretations have taken the form of his writing and his distinctive way of doing philosophy seriously. The 1980s have also seen the emergence of a body of work on Wittgenstein that makes extensive use of the unpublished Wittgenstein papers. This work on Wittgenstein's method and his way of writing are the main themes of this literature review.Section 1 surveys Wittgenstein's conception of philosophical method and its reception. Section 2 is a review of recent work on rule-following and the methodological issues it raises. Section 3 concerns research on the WittgensteinNachlass and its implications for the interpretation of his philosophy.     

Wittgenstein on Expectation,Action, and Internal Relations, 1930–1932

According to Wittgenstein, internal relations are such that, once their terms are given, it is unthinkable that they do not hold. In his early philosophy, the concept of internal relation plays a central role in his views on meaning. The present paper addresses the question of how Wittgenstein's views about internal relations develop during his years of transition (1930–32). In particular, it investigates the connections between the concepts of internal relation, logical multiplicity, and aspect seeing in two thematic fields: (1) Wittgenstein's discussion of the relation between an expectation and what fulfils it, and (2) his discussion of the relation between a sign and an action guided by it.     

PDP and Gestalt: An integration?

Summary The possibility of a synthesis between parallel distributed processing approaches (PDP) and Gestalt psychology is discussed. The empiricist outlook of PDP is an obstacle to such a synthesis. Gestalt's belief in organization of the psychological field as the basic principle is not shared by the PDP approach. It is claimed that, nevertheless, Gestalt psychology can use PDP techniques for modeling organization processes, provided that some constraints are obeyed. From a PDP point of view, importing Gestalt constraints could be a useful strategy for obtaining testable predictions.     

Some reflections on potential abuses of psychology’s knowledge and practices

This article identifies ten implicit and explicit assumptions of Western psychology that are rooted within its cultural history, traditions, and values. Unfortunately, these assumptions have informed and dominated the knowledge and practice of psychology across the world because of historic, cultural, political, and economic reasons. It is now clear, however, that the indiscriminate acceptance and application of Western psychological knowledge and practices constitutes a serious abuse for non-Western people and for ethnic/racial minorities in Western nations. This abuse is often transmitted and exacerbated via the training of international and ethnic minority students who learn to accept Western psychology as universal. In a global community in which all our lives have become interdependent, it is essential Western psychology be re-considered as a “cultural construction” with all the ethnocentric limitations this implies. As a counter, efforts must be made to acknowledge, develop, and transmit the diverse indigenous/national psychologies from across the world.