1. Why did Wundt believe that experimentation in psychology was of limited uselessness?
The distinction is what kind of science can be conducted on what kind of subject. Wundt placed a larger segment of psychology in Geisteswissenschaften than in the Naturwissenschaften (natural), because he realized the limitations of experimentation. Therefore, yes, Wundt believed that experimentation in psychology was of limited usefulness since he argued that in this broad perspective a variety of methods such as developmental, comparative, introspective, dedicative, statistical and experimental could and should be brought to bear on the analysis of psychologic phenomena. In addition, he made it clear that experimental methods, though of great potential importance, were of relatively limited applicability. Wundt believed that the human sciences provided a more thorough account, incorporating introspection, society, morals, culture, etc. into psychology to provide …show more content…
It is the will that makes psychological causation qualitatively different from physical causation. Since intentions are willfully created they cannot be predicted or understood in terms of physical causation. Another factor that makes the prediction of psychological events impossible is the principle of the heterogony of ends, which states a goal-directed activity seldom attains its goal and nothing else. Something unexpected usually happens that changes one's entire motivational pattern. Wundt also maintained that opposite experiences intensify one another, which is called the principle of contrasts. The principle of the development of opposites states that after a prolonged experience of one type, there is an increased tendency to seek the opposite type of experience. This applies to an individual as well as human
The distinction is what kind of science can be conducted on what kind of subject. Wundt placed a larger segment of psychology in Geisteswissenschaften than in the Naturwissenschaften (natural), because he realized the limitations of experimentation. Therefore, yes, Wundt believed that experimentation in psychology was of limited usefulness since he argued that in this broad perspective a variety of methods such as developmental, comparative, introspective, dedicative, statistical and experimental could and should be brought to bear on the analysis of psychologic phenomena. In addition, he made it clear that experimental methods, though of great potential importance, were of relatively limited applicability. Wundt believed that the human sciences provided a more thorough account, incorporating introspection, society, morals, culture, etc. into psychology to provide …show more content…
It is the will that makes psychological causation qualitatively different from physical causation. Since intentions are willfully created they cannot be predicted or understood in terms of physical causation. Another factor that makes the prediction of psychological events impossible is the principle of the heterogony of ends, which states a goal-directed activity seldom attains its goal and nothing else. Something unexpected usually happens that changes one's entire motivational pattern. Wundt also maintained that opposite experiences intensify one another, which is called the principle of contrasts. The principle of the development of opposites states that after a prolonged experience of one type, there is an increased tendency to seek the opposite type of experience. This applies to an individual as well as human