Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-767nl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-10T16:17:49.219Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Significance of Psychology for the Study of Politics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2014

Charles E. Merriam
Charles E. Merriam*
Affiliation:
University of Chicago
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

As a part of its work, the committee on research of the American Political Science Association has undertaken a survey of the relation of politics to kindred types of inquiry, including psychology, anthropology, geography, biology, engineering and others. The purpose of such an inquiry is to explore the relationships that exist with kindred sciences, to facilitate coöperation with our fellow-workers, to improve our methods of investigation, and to promote the progress of political science.

The committee is not responsible for this report, for its form or content, its scope or method, its sins of omission or commission. Probably the general sentiment of the committee toward psychology would be expressed by the phrase, con amore ma non troppo.

It may be worth while at the outset to scrutinize some of the earlier relations of psychology to political science, for the friendship is one of long standing. In the earlier forms of political thinking, there are crude types of psychology that are of great interest and significance in the development of the art of political thinking. These philosophers evidently utilized all of the psychology that was current in the construction of their political systems.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 18 , Issue 3 , August 1924 , pp. 469 - 488
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1924

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 F. W. Coker, Organismic Theories of the State. Compare also David J. Ritchie, Darwinism and Politics, and Davis, M. M., Psychological Interpretations of Society, 1909.Google Scholar

2 Government of England, 1, 448, See also his significant presidential address on “The Physiology of Politics”. American Political Science Review IV, 1–15, noting that “the subject lacks the first essential of a modern science—a nomenclature incomprehensible to educated men.”

3 I, 15. See also chapter 13 on traditions; also the chapter on Obedience in Essays in History and Jurisprudence.

4 Brett, , History of Psychology, 4 vols.Google Scholar, gives a comprehensive survey of the growth of psychology.

5 A summary of these differences is given in the Journal of Educational Psychology, 12 (1921).

6 Psychoanalytical Review, 10, 1215 (1921).

7 Hollingsworth, Applied Psychology.

8 See Gosnell, Harold F., “Some Practical Applications of Psychology to Politics,” 28 American Journal of Sociology, 735.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

9 See E. M. Martin, in Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology.

10 An interesting analysis of the meaning of these tests is given. Freeman, F. N., “A Referendum of Psychologists,” Century Magazine, December, 1923.Google Scholar

11 Whipple, G. M., “The Intelligence Testing Program and the Objectors Conscientious and Otherwise,” School and Society, XVII, 561.Google Scholar

12 See summary in Well's, F. L. “The Status of Clinical Psychology”. Mental Hygiene, 1922.Google Scholar

13 W. M. Wheeler, Social Life Among Insects.

14 Tolman, E. C., “The Nature of Instinct,” Psychobgical Bulletin, 1923, No. 1, p. 218.Google Scholar Note bibliography.

15 Davis, A. E., “The Influence of Biology on the Development of Modern Psychology in America”, 30 Psychohgical Review, 164–75 (1923).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.