From psychology to introspective psychology. How did it go?

This page is also available in: Italiano (Italian) Português (Portuguese (Portugal))

Brief history of Introspective Psychology

(Estimated reading time: 6 min, 52 sec)

Q: When and how was introspective psychology born? How did it evolve?

Here is some information about the origin and development of psychology.

Later, on the next pages, we will describe how art, psychology, and introspection collaborate. They are all valid tools for emotional well-being.

Psychology — from the origins to Wundt (Part 1)

In the early16th century, the German Lutheran humanist Philipp Melanchthon used the word “psychology”.

Plato, Aristotle, and many other philosophers had already spoken of the psyche as a soul. They considered it a vital breath, an immaterial part of the human being.

The scientific rigor is common in math and the natural sciences. It became more important in the methods and experiments of psychology.

Philipp Melanchthon.by Lucas Cranach the Elder. — Philipp Melanchthon by Lucas Cranach the Elder – 1. Originally uploaded to en.wikipedia 2. The Bridgeman Art Library, Object 228519

Kant — the empirical doctrine of the soul

“Taking up and continuing the English empiricists’ criticism of the possibility of a philosophical psychology of a priori-deductive character, Kant had also denied the possibility of an empirical psychology. He resolved the latter into a descriptive anthropology, excluded from the realm of true sciences, because of a listing and classifying nature.

In the ‘Metaphysische Anfangsgründe der Naturwissenschaft’ (‘Metaphysical Foundations of Natural Science’ 1786), Kant asserted that the empirical doctrine of the soul must always remain far from being considered a natural science, worthy of this name (…) — since mathematics is not applicable to the phenomena of the inner sense and their laws.” Ludovico Geymonat; Storia del Pensiero Filosofico e Scientifico, VI — Dall’Ottocento al Novecento, Capitolo secondo: La Nascita della Psicologia Scientifica by Franca Meotti.

In the second half of the nineteenth century, the first schools of psychology were born.

Their main interest was neurology and the physiology of the nervous system.

The first time psychology became an independent discipline was in 1879. It had its own object, its own methods and its own instruments. That was when Wilhelm Wundt founded the Laboratory of Experimental Psychology in Leipzig.

Wundt’s method of introspection

The German psychologist Wundt introduced a method of introspection.

It was based on the descriptive study of the sensations perceived by the subject in successive phases of stimulation.

The subject had to describe the perceived sensory processes with meticulous care.

Wundt studied the basic functions of the mind, like sensation and perception. This has made psychology more reliable and authoritative.

Many schools of thought criticized Wundt’s method of introspection. Critics considered this method inappropriate for studying unconscious processes. They did not see them as a subject of psychology. They found this method incapable of grasping the higher psychic processes. It reports not what is happening, but how the subject thinks things are happening.

For these reasons, Wundt abandoned this method in favor of the positivist paradigm.

He preferred to search for a new experimental method. It would be more verifiable, measurable, and standardized.

Wilhelm Wundt (Wikipedia image). Important figure in the history of introspective psychology — Wilhelm-Wundt-By-Unknown-author-Weltrundschau-zu-Reclams-Universum-1902-Public-Domain-httpscommons.Wikimedia.org windex.phpcurid10652603.jpg

Titchener’s Experimental Introspectionism

Edward Bradford Titchener was an exponent of structuralism. He was a student of Wundt. He continued introspection.

He affirmed that introspection is the best method for studying the mind.

For Titchener, the ego and the self are in a dimension that cannot be studied experimentally. They are, therefore, extraneous to scientific psychology.

Psychologists investigate to describe the contents of consciousness, and to reveal the laws and patterns that govern their combination and succession.

“The main tool Titchener used to determine the various components of consciousness was introspection. Titchener writes in his Systematic Psychology: ‘The state of consciousness which is to be the subject of psychology… can become an object of direct knowledge only by introspection or self-knowledge.’

And in his book ‘An Outline of Psychology: ’… within the sphere of psychology, introspection is the final and only court of appeal, that psychological evidence cannot be nothing but introspective evidence.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structuralism (Psychology)

Thus, from 1879 to 1905, the introspective method survived in psychology. This was despite many vicissitudes and conflicts among scientists.

By author died more than 70 years ago - http://www.sepsych.org/titchrner.htm, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=3372672 — Edward Titchener, a promoter of Introspective Psychology. (Photo By author, died over 70 years ago. http://www.sepsych.org/titchrner.htm, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=3372672)

The End of Introspection in Psychology (Part 2)

The 5th International Congress of Psychology was in Rome in April 1905. It decreed the end of using introspection and intuition in psychology.

This limited psychology to a scientific view. But that view would not always make it more effective at healing.

How much would this perspective contribute to inner well-being?

Below, I report on the closing session of the congress. The congress decreed the end of introspection.

CLOSING SESSION OF THE

5th INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS OF PSYCHOLOGY

HELD IN ROME FROM APRIL 26 TO 30,1905

Under the presidency of Professor Giuseppe Sergi.

5th International Congress of Psychology.

GENERAL CLOSING SESSION

April 30th, two p.m.

All the honorary congress presidents elected at the opening session will preside.

Professor G. Sergi.

Photo of Prof. Sergi. — Giuseppe Sergi. Photo taken from his publications, Public domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=75199563

closing speech of the Rome congress.

Many believe that a congress can and should solve all the problems of science, and when they do not see this result, they think that congresses are useless.

This disappointment is perhaps even greater in a congress like ours, where some expect to find a solution to the problems of the soul, to dispel the shadows that surround them, to remove doubts about human destiny.

This time, however, we can calmly face the judgment of the results obtained, which are not and should not be the solutions to these problems.

Two tendencies and two methods were evident, both here in the Congress and outside it, among thinkers and observers of the concerns of the human psyche.

Well, we can say that the direction given by this congress to the study of psychology is clear and decisive, despite appearances to the contrary.

Directives of the International Congress of Psychology

We have recognized that the observation of phenomena involving psychological concerns can no longer be empirical, but must be scientific and methodical, and also experimental, with precision instruments as in other experimental sciences.

This is an achievement of unquestionable value.

The scientists who have intervened here, according to their different personal studies, have brought scientific contributions of great value and high knowledge that we could consider as gained in science: They have given a correct direction to the way to reach the truth in the manifestations of the human psyche.

Psychology, which has become a science with the contribution of many other sciences from which it is inseparable, will achieve even more universal results.

Writers and artists, who until now have worked empirically and by intuition alone, will benefit from it.

Greetings and a thanks to all those who took part in the Congress and especially to the foreigners who brought the results of their studies to Italy; thanks also to Professor Sante De Sanctis, whose work contributed so much with his work to the success of the Congress.

To consult the complete compilation of the acts of the congress:

http://archive.org/stream/attidelvcongres00sancgoog#page/n343/mode/2up

Introspective Psychology (Part 3)

The Revival of inner research in psychology

Why eliminate a tool that has proven to be effective — just because it was mandated by the 1905 Congress of Rome?

We know that introspection doesn’t follow scientific standards and protocol parameters.

But our goal is to bring back to light inner research aimed at emotional well-being.

The introspective method is proving effective in psychology. It improves the quality of people’s lives.

I’ve always wondered how it is possible to enter the emotional world with rational tools. — Is this the most effective way to deal with our inner world?

Emotions, though fleeting and intangible, are powerful. Major psychotherapeutic schools testify that they can cause existential illness. But introspection goes beyond the limits of rationality. It’s only when we choose to enter the intuitive world that flashes of light shine in the darkness of our malaise.

Introspective Research, Introspective Art and inner well-being

Painting uses the language of emotions and sensations, a language that operates in a different time from that of words and reason.

We should accept its natural flow without interfering with the mind.

We need preparation to enter this state of being. At the beginning, we also need to listen, and have a lot of trust in our feelings. Then art can be a useful tool of introspection. It helps us find parts of ourselves that we have ignored with rational judgments.

When we have an intuitive feeling for the colors and symbols of a painting, something opens within us; in this way we can reach hidden parts of the subconscious…

It becomes easier to enter these spaces — even if we have to rationalize or find a logical meaning.

But we know from experience that understanding and alleviating emotional pain is not a matter of reason.

Why should it lead to emotional well-being?

I use Introspective Art in my research because I see it as a catalyst for deep emotional dynamics.

Introspective art focuses on what is inside us, in the subconscious. It brings it to light by depicting it in a painting. It’s an art inspired by the unconscious of the artist to communicate with the unconscious of other people.

An introspective painting penetrates the observer’s defenses. It does what rationality cannot do. It sets up direct communication between the observer and the painting.

This communication makes it easier to release tension and achieve emotional well-being.

How Introspective Art works

The probable opening helps and makes the next steps easier. We should:

Analyze what lies beyond the opening.
Make the most of the opening time.
Concentrate on gathering and interpreting data, rather than trying to overcome resistance.
Understand how the mind perceives and processes visual input based on experience.

This is what happens when people look at introspective art. It encourages them to reflect on their feelings and become self-aware. After the contact with the painting has ended, people can think about what has come up: their judgments, self-criticism, fears… They can enter into a dialogue with their own inner world. They can recognize the feelings that the painting has aroused. The end point is inner integration, and a reduction of the inner conflicts we all experience.

This leads to well-being and an increase in the quality of life.

Antonella Giannini

Facebook Pinterest LinkedIn X (Twitter)