Symbolic Action Theory and Cultural Psychology
Gustav Jahoda University of Strathclyde Ever since psychology emerged as a separate discipline about a century ago, there have been differing views as to what it is or ought to be. Some, like Ebbinghaus, saw it as a budding natural science, experimental a
- PDF / 76,517,357 Bytes
- 395 Pages / 439.37 x 666.14 pts Page_size
- 109 Downloads / 234 Views
Symbolic Action Theory and Cultural Psychology
Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg New York London Paris Tokyo Hong Kong Barcelona Budapest
A uthor
E rnest E . Boesch Drosselweg 8, W-6601 Scheidt-SB, FRG
ISBN- 13: 978-3-540-53992-6 001 : 10.1007/978-3-642-84497-3
This work is subj«:t to copyrigh t. An rights are reserved, whether the whOle Or parI of tile material is concerned, specificall y the rights oflrallslation, reprintillg, ,e_use of illuslrations. recitation. broadcasting, reproduction 011 microfilms Or in olher ways, and storage in data banks. Duplication of this publication or parIS thereof is only permitted under the provisions of the G erman Copyrigh t Law of September 9, 1965, in its current version, 311d II copyright fee must always be paid. ViOlations fall under the prO$ecUlion act of the German Copyright Law. C Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1991
212&3140-543210 - Printed on add-free paper
Foreword Gustav Jahoda
University of Strathclyde
Ever since psychology emerged as a separate discipline about a century ago, there have been differing views as to what it is or ought to be. Some, like Ebbinghaus, saw it as a budding natural science, experimental and quantitative. Others, like Dilthey, regarded psychology in the main as a humane field of study, historical and interpretative in character. The dichotomy of "explaining" versus "understanding" has been a subject of debate ever since. Regrettably, most of the protagonists of these respective positions tend to view them as mutually exclusive, in spite of the fact that already Wundt had stressed that "hard" experimental and "soft" VOlkerpsychologie are both equally important. For the major part of the present century the field has been largely dominated by advocates of "hard-nosed" scientific approaches, typified first by Behaviorism and, latterly, cognitive psychology which concentrates on central processes involved in cognition. Without in any way wishing to denigrate the undoubted achievements of cognitive psychology, it has its limitations that are epitomized by T.H. Huxley's dictum "The great end of life is not knowledge but action". This might well serve as the motto for the action theory of Ernest Boesch, who is one of several prominent psychologists out of harmony with the prevailing ethos. They travel under different banners such as "social constructivism", "ethogenics" or "hermeneutics", but all share reservations about what many feel is the arid "scientism" of the mainstream. Boesch's "symbolic action theory", while it may be considered part of this movement, is distinctive by its linkage with "culture". Here again, in his emphasis on the cultural context, he is not alone. For about a generation a good number of cross-cultural psychologists have been critical of the neglect of culture by most theorists, and more recently there has been a convergence between them and the advocates of a new "cultural psychology" that takes up again Wundt's original project in the light of modern knowledge. Boesch is one of the pioneers of "cultural ps
