William James on emotion and intentionality

In my reply I focus on three topics: the usefulness of Searle’s physical analogies for understanding the relationship between higher-level mental properties and lower-level physical properties, the question of overdetermination and the causal efficacy of unconscious intentional states. I argue that Searle’s reply does not refute my arguments against his analogies, while concerns about overdetermination are only taken away because his reply shows that there is no genuine unconscious mental causation in his view. That makes it hard to understand how he can maintain at the same time that we follow rules unconsciously.     

威廉·詹姆斯与具身认知心理学

威廉·詹姆斯是美国心理学的创始人,被世人称为"美国心理学之父"。他创造了一整套的心理学理论,包括在具身认知兴起的过程中,他也发挥了重要的、不可替代的作用。而具身认知主要指在人们的认知过程中身体发挥着重要的关键作用,亦即认知是人们通过身体的具体体验及其活动方式而产生的。文章主要通过具身认知的兴起来了解在詹姆斯的一整套心理学理论中所包含的具身认知思想以及探究詹姆斯在其中发挥的重大作用。     

Daydreaming, Consciousness, and Self-Representations: Empirical Approaches to Theories of William James and Sigmund Freud

In honor of Saul Rosenzweig's lifelong efforts to provide empirical tests of psychoanalytic theories, this paper has focused on a series of research approaches to examining the concepts of William James and Sigmund Freud relating to waking fantasy, ongoing thought, and beliefs about the self. Studies involving projective methods, psychometric analyses of self-report questionnaires, laboratory tests of daydreaming during signal-detection tasks, thought-sampling during natural daily activities and psychological correlates of actual-self and ideal-self discrepancies are described. Clinical applications of these methods are also presented. The findings in general point to the value of James's conception of conscious thought as an important basis along with cognitive unconscious processes for studying clinical phenomena, personality, and even the metaphors of dreams. Rosenzweig's emphasis on formal research testing of psychoanalytic processes is supported.     

William James: a contradiction.

The author describes a contradiction in William James's Principles of Psychology and traces some of its consequences. In particular, he calls attention to the question of dating certain aspects of this work, and to the ambivalence toward Helmholtz expressed therein.     

In the Spirit of William James

In this essay, I identify several ways in which James Dittes extended the spirit of William James in his writings on psychology of religion. Like James, Dittes gave minimal attention to psychological theory and God-talk. Both authors located their reflections on religion within a philosophical, as well as a psychological, perspective. Both employed a discourse that was personalist, pluralist, and pragmatist. In the last section, I briefly note some of the ways in which Dittes moved beyond William James in the spirit of William James.     

William James and Buddhism: American Pragmatism and the Orient

William James pursued far-ranging enquiries in America across the fields of psychology, philosophy and religious studies between 1890 and 1910. Historical and comparative overlaps emerge between James and Buddhism from these pursuits. This article first sets out James' own nineteenth-century American context. There follows James' own more explicit references to Buddhism, which particularly focused on the meaning of the term ‘religion’ and on specific elements of Buddhist teachings. In turn comes a substantive comparative look at certain themes in both James and Buddhism, namely, ‘consciousness’, ‘integration’ and ‘criteria of truth claims’. The common functionalist tendencies in James and Buddhism are highlighted. Finally, the article attempts a wider look at the interaction between American thought and Buddhism during the twentieth century. This interaction is exemplified by John Dewey, Charles Hartshorne, Daisetz Suzuki, Kitaro Nishida and David Kalupahana, and also across the fields of psychology, pragmatism and process philosophy. In all of these areas James emerges as a significant figure for studying American thought and Buddhism.