American Social Psychology

8/8/2019 American Social Psychology

1/21

AMERICAN SOCIALPSYCHOLOGYIts Origins, Development, and European Background

B YFA Y BERGER KARPF, P H . D .Lecturer in the Theory and Methods of Social Investigation and

Director ofthe Department of Social Research, TheGraduateSchool for Jewish Social Work

WITH A FOREWORD BYELLSWORTH FARIS, P H . D .

Professor and Chairman of the Department of Sociology,The University of Chicago

F I R S T E D I T I O N

McGRAW-HILL BOOK COMPANY, I N G .N E W YOEK AND LONDON1932


2/21

C O P Y R I G H T , 1932, BY THEM C G R A W - H I L L B O O K C O M P A N Y , INC.

PRINTED IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

All rights reserved. This book, orparts thereof, may not be reproducedin any form without permission of

the publishers.

T H E MAPLE PRESS COMPANY, YORK, PA.


3/21


4/21


5/21

P R E F A C EThis work had its origin in the attempt to outline the developmentof social-psychological thoug ht in this coun try. B ut since this subjectcould not be presented significantly in isolation, the work has graduallyassumed its present proportions.The study was begun in 1921 when the need for some such surveystood out glaringly, and it was completed in its original form in 1925.Since that time, the appearance of several shorter surveys, especiallythe chapter by Kimball Young in The History and Prospects of the SocialSciences, edited by H arry E lmer B arnes, has indicated the importanceof the material and encouraged its revision and elaboration to its presentform.The treatment, except for some necessary background, has been con-

fine d to the developm ent of social psychology as social psychology.H ence no attem pt has been made to extend the background surveybeyond the nineteenth century crystallizations of social-psychologicalthough t. A lso, the treatm ent has throughout been determined by theoriginal interest in illuminating American social-psychological thought.This consideration explains many details of emphasis and procedurewhich might otherwise come into question.The method of presentation decided upon as being best adapted tothe accurate handling of the task in hand, in view of the very importantrole which personalities still play in the social-psychological movement,is a modified form of biographical exposition organized broadly, as amatter of convenience and in order to be able to reflect the developmentof A merican social psychology upon the background of E uropean tho ug ht,along relevant national lines. T his method has certain obvious adva n-tages in providing natural classifications, which to the author seemeddetermining in the present state of social-psychological development.H owever, it also has, as would an y other method, some definite lim ita-tions. There are thus certain other possible approaches to the con-sideration of social psychology and especially of social psychologists.Professor Faris has undertaken to suggest in the Foreword how some ofthem might be followed out with profit in filling out the picture hereunfolded.No claim is made for exhaustiveness of treatment in any part of thissurvey and certainly not in the European background. T he treatm enthas necessarily been selective. O thers might have varied the emphasis


6/21

viii PREFACEand selection of material to be dealt with somewhat, but not materially,since the limitations of space to a single volume have made it possibleto deal only with the high spots of recognized lines of influence.

Something remains to be said about the form of presentation adoptedin this survey. F or obvious reasons, it seemed highly desirable to presentthe crucial points in an author's position as far as possible in his ownwords. T he superiority of this manner of presenting such m aterialcannot be questioned and the method has been adhered to, in someinstances even at the expense of sm oothness and conciseness of exposition,especially in P art I I of the survey. In P ar t I, it was naturally lessfeasible to follow out this manner of presentation consistently, but eventhere it was adhered to at especially important points.

T he preparation of a work like this obviously places one under a m any-sided obligation to authors, publishers, and others intimately connectedwith the work. Specific acknowledgments of indebtedness, especiallyin the first two connections, must necessarily be taken care of in thefootnote and bibliographic references. B ut the author finds it neces-sary to make the following further acknowledgments:F irst and foremost, th e au thor is under obligation to the late D eanA lbion W . S mall and P rofessors F aris, P ark, and B urgess of the Univer-sity of Chicago, all of whom have at one time or another offered valuablesuggestions in respect to the preparation of the man uscript. P rofessorFaris, in particular, has been intimately in contact with the work fromthe beginning. N ot only was the work in the first instance carried outunder his guidance, but he has maintained an unfailing interest in them aterial ever since. I n addition, he has read the entire m anuscript ontwo different occasions. In the course of his contact with every phaseof the work, he has made many invaluable suggestions which have inone way or anoth er been adopted. T he author welcomes this oppor-tunity to acknowledge the important part which he has had in the plan-ning of the work.Professor Reuter of the University of Iowa, editor of the series inwhich the work appears, has likewise read the manuscript twice and he,too, has made invaluable suggestions which have been incorporated inth e completed work. T he author is particularly under obligation tohim for his critical evaluation of parts of the material and for his experteditorial advice and assistance in the final preparation of the manuscriptfor publication.P rofessor L ouis W irth of the U niversity of C hicago has been veryhelpful in respect to the section dealing with German social-psychologicalthoug ht. H e not only directed the auth or's atten tion from time to tim e

to important source materials, but he also read the entire section inproof. While he did not completely agree with certain points of evalua-


7/21

PREFACE ixtion relevant to this section, his comments and especially references to thepertinent literature were extremely valuable.

Professor Moses J. Aronson, formerly of The Sorbonne and now ofThe College of the City of New York, has been similarly helpful inrespect to the section dealing with French social-psychological thought.Not only did he read the entire section in proof but his comments regard-ing various details of treatment proved to be exceptionally helpful andencouraging.

The following graduate students of the Department of Sociology atthe University of Chicago assisted in the collection of the original materialsof this study during the early stages of the work: W. P. Meroney, CelianUfford, Evalyn Cohn, Clifford Manschardt, Alison R. Bryan, WilliamS. Hockman, Percy E. Lindley, Belle T. Pardue, Ada Davis, FrancesWatson, Regena Beckmire. Grateful acknowledgment of their assist-ance is hereby made.

The author also wishes to acknowledge gratefully the help of Dr.Ruth Shonle Cavan of Rockford, Illinois, in assisting in the early set-upof the material and in later taking over the task of preparing the Index.Appreciative acknowledgment is also made of the assistance of Mr.George M. Wolfe, Research Assistant at The Graduate School forJewish Social Work, who has read the entire page proof and assisted inthe preparation of the bibliography. Mr. Jacob B. Lightman and MissEttarae Serlin, Research and Assistant Librarians at the latter institu-tion, have likewise been helpful in the preparation and checking of thebibliography.

The author further wishes to acknowledge the courtesy of authorsand publishers who have generously permitted the inclusion of quotationsfrom their works. Acknowledgment of this is made specifically inconnection with the quotations used, but the author feels this furtheracknowledgment is justified by the whole-hearted response of the pub-lishers and authors involved.

Most of all the author is under obligation to Dr. M. J. Karpf for hisinvaluable aid in every phase of the work. No merely formal statementof indebtedness can possibly do justice to his contribution to the for-mulation, planning, and execution of the work.

F . B. K.N E W Y O R K , N. Y.,March, 1932.


8/21


9/21

CONTENTSP A G E

P R E F A C E v i iF O R E W O R D B Y E L L S W O R T H F A R I S xiiiI N T R O D U C T I O N 1

P A R T IE U R O P E A N B A C K G R O U N D

C H A P T E R IN I N E T E E N T H C E N T UR Y P H IL O SO P H IC A L B A CK G RO UN D 7

I . G . W . F . H egel 7I I . A uguste C omte 14

I I I . H erbert Spencer 26C H A P T E R I I

T H E D E VE L O P M E N T O F S O CIA L -P S Y CH O L O G IC A L T H O U G H T I N G E R M A N Y 41I . Introductory S tatement 41I I . T he Stu dy of C ulture H istory as an A pproach to Social P sychology:Folk P sychology 421. M oritz Lazarus and H ermann Steinthal 422. W ilhelm W undt 51

I I I . S ocial-psychological A spects of G erma n Sociology 661. A lbert Schaffle 672. Ludwig G umplowicz and G ustav R atzenhofer 713 . G eorg Simmel and M ore R ecent D evelopments 75C H A P T E R I I I

T H E D H V EL O P M E N T O F S OC IA L -P S Y CH O LO G IC A L T H O U G H T I N F R A N C E 89I . Introductory S tatement 89

I I . The Study of Imitation as an Approach to Social Psychology: Inter-psychology 931. G arbriel T arde 93I I I . The Study of "Collective Representations" as an Approach to SocialP sychology: C ollective P sychology 1081. Em ile D urkheim 1082. Lucien L e>y-B ruhl 123IV. The Study of Crowd Behavior as an Approach to Social Psychology:Crowd P sychology 1341. G ustave Le Bon 134

C H A P T E R I VT H E D E VE L O P M E N T O F S O CIA L -P S Y CH O LO G IC A L T H O U G H T I N E N G L A N D 145I . Introductory S tatement 145

xi


10/21

xii CONTENTSP A G B

I I . The Background of English Evolutionary Doctrine 1471. Charles Darwin and Herbert Spencer 1472 . Walter Bagehot 1583 . English Evolutionary Anthropology 165

I I I . The Study of the Instinctive Basis of Social Behavior as an Approach toSocial Psychology: Instinct Psychology 173

1. William McDougall 1762 . Wilfred Trotter, Graham Wallas, Leonard T. Hobhouse . . . . 196

P A R T IIT H E D E V E L O P M E N T OF S O C I A L - P S Y C H O L O G I C A L T H O U G H TI N THE U N I T E D S T A T E S

C H A P T E R VB A C K G R O U N D A ND B E G I N N IN G S 211I . Introductory Statement 211

I I . Lester F. W a r d and Other Early American Sociological Influences . . 216I I I . William James and Other Early American Psychological Influences. . 247

C H A P T E R VIS OC I AL - P S YC H OL OGI C AL T H O U G H T AS AN E X T E N S I O N OP P S Y C H O L O G I C A L ANDS OC I OL OGI C AL T H E O R Y 269I . James M. Baldwin 269

II. C H A R L E S H. C O O L E Y 291C H A P T E R VII

T H E E M E R G E N C E OP A D I F F E R E N T I A T E D S O C I A L P S Y C H O L O G Y 308I . Edward A. Ross 308I I . George H. Mead 318

I I I . John D ewey 327IV. William I. Thomas, Ellsworth Faris, and Others Associated with TheirSocial-psychological Viewpoints 351

C H A P T E R V I I IT H E E M E R G E N C E OF A D I FF E R E N T I A T E D S O CIA L P S Y CH O LO G Y ( C O N T I N U E D ) A T T E M P T S AT S Y S TE M A T IC T R E A T M E N T 385

I . Charles A. Ellwood 385I I . E m o r y S. Bogardus 394

III . Other Recent Attempts at Systematic Treatment 4001. Floyd H. AUport 4002. L. L. Bernard 4073. Kimball Young and Others 413C H A P T E R IX

SUMMARY A N D C O N C L U S IO N 416B I B L I O G R A P H Y 431I N D E X 449


11/21

F O R E W O R DSocial psychology is a vital and important subject of present-daydiscussion and investigation throughout the world, perhaps particularlyin A merica. A ttemp ts to designate it by special terms and to give itsystematic formulation began only a little over twenty years ago, butsince that time systematic treatments of it in books are found by the

dozen. O ther books dealing with various aspects of the field, althoughnot necessarily bearing the title, are numbered by the hundred, whilearticles and special researches of a briefer character carried in the learnedjournals of the world are to be counted literally by the thousand . N oris there any sign of a decrease in interest. O n the co ntrary , more menare working in the field now tha n ever before. T he present work ofD r. Karpf, which attempts to give the history of American social psy-chology, with its European background, is thus, in the highest degree,timely.The interest in social psychology has not been confined to any onesection of social science. O n the co ntrary , w orkers in sociology, psy-chology, economics, and political science, historians, psychiatrists, andeven literary men have all written important and significant books whichmust be classified as directly bearing on this field. The attempt tounderstand social psychology is obviously greater every year, and thestudent who tries to avail himself of the heritage is confronted with alaborious and confusing body of reading which soon makes him aware ofthe need of some guiding clew. I t is clear then th at a historical guidelike the present work ought to serve a very useful purpose, besides beingof general interest to the intellectual reader.Social psychology has already accumulated a body of traditions,problems, explanations, and systems which form a broad stream whosetribu taries can be traced far back in time and space. T he sources offergreat va riety. T o trace them back to a single origin is, of course, impos-sible, for there is not one but m any. M oreover, as the stream flows on,some channels have been cut out at an angle and by a divergent pathhave been flow ing on u ntil they have become lost in th e desiccations ofthe desert sand. T here are other m udd y curren ts which have refusedto mingle with the main stream, being particularly resistant to theassimilating influence of the rest.T here are, of course, m any ways of describing all this . T he auth orhas chosen a sort of modified biographical treatment inherited from thetradition of histories of philosophy, and by copious quotation and sym-


12/21

x iv F O R E WO R Dpathetic condensation has set for herself the task of giving the readerthe teachings of the various authors on the questions that interestedthem most. F rench, G erman, and E nglish writers pass in review beforethe reader, for all these have left a tradition without which the viewsof the A mericans could not be understood. Un til the latte r pa rt of thework is reached the treatment of the Americans is roughly chronological,so that the development can be seen and the influences traced.A history of American social psychology might be written in one oftwo or three ways. I t would hardly be possible to write it in all threeof these ways. T he choice of the plan m ust obviously be left to th e au tho r.If, therefore, the reader finds certain gaps in it, that must be set downto th e necessities of literary choice. M oreover, with the clews heresupplied these gaps can be filled in by sufficiently vigorous effort andsufficiently wide acquaintance with the literature.In the first place, the student would like to know more about theplace of a given author in his social and cultural setting. T he answer tothis demand would tend to add to the question of what the author teachesand what he advocates the more difficult question of why he taught andadvocated those doctrines. O bviously here anyone who tries to answer istreadin g on slippery ground. Just why the arde nt and valian t defendersof instincts should be also in the main conservative in their philosophical,social, and political views, many of them being avowedly vocal opponentsof democracy; just why the vigorous advocates of behaviorism shouldadopt a violently radical attitude toward religion and conventional moralswith which the doctrine of behaviorism strictly defined has no moreconnection tha n it has with the politics of M ars ; just w hy one author orone group of authors should hold that fundamental in human life is adesire for exciting and thrilling experiences, while others, perhapsbecause their work is more interesting, find no truth in the doctrine; whyone author's work breathes sympathy with the oppressed classes, fur-nishes texts for economic radicals, while another's becomes a vade mecumfor defenders of the status quoall these questions are very difficult butnot w ithout their central importance. T o answer them would require avigorous and persistent campaign in attempting to unearth the personaland biographical details of each man's life, and the result would be aninterpretation so difficult to make objective that the success of such aneffort would always be problematical. N evertheless the question is notout of order. W e know already too much about the relation of thoug htand reflection to action and ambition to fail to realize that we musteventually psychologize the psychologist if we are to understand hispsychology.There is another and easier and less invidious aspect of the historyof social psychology which it would be interesting to know. E ach authoris not merely the deliverer of a message; he is the exponent of a culture


13/21

FOREWORD XVor, in our day, of some aspect of the cu lture of his people. F or mind isnot merely individual mind, nor is it merely social mind; it is, as we havebeen taught by Cooley, an organic whole; the individual and society aretwin born. E ach writer, therefore, not only writes abou t the group.H e is also a pa rt of a group. H is ideas are generated in his group. T hesocial forces that made and are still making social psychology are notinaccessible, and the trends of thought and sentiment if set alongsidethe expositions here would add much to that which we should like toknow about the development of the science. P erhap s the autho r willbe granted the leisure and have the impulse to make this account clearin a subsequent volume. I t is to be hoped that she will; and if she does,she will put us all the more in her debt.The instinct doctrine of social psychology, now rapidly dying out, didnot come into existence full armed, nor do we account for it adequatelywhen we give the arguments and statements of any particular author whois an advocate of th at definite system. I t is only in perspective, perhap s,that we can see how the various antecedent formulations were foundincreasingly difficult and how gradually this particular scheme came tobe more advantageous. M oreover, when the doctrine began to lose itsascendency, it would be interesting and highly profitable to know whatwere the various influences, forces, and weaknesses which finally broughtabout the transition to something which seems to be more satisfactory.The presentation of separate authors with their separate views, whileinteresting and quite necessary, does not give the connection betweenand relation to the various points of view out of which the doctrine grewor into which it merged or which it stirred up . A nd there are m any ofthese which it would be best fitting to have set forth in such a manner.The extreme reflex doctrine, starting in Russia and somewhat independ-ently in America with the study of animals and influenced by many otherforces, conspicuous among them the conflicts among the orthodoxpsychologies regarding the presence of imageless thought, and the firmhold that the doctrine of elements had, even for those who had rejectedthe instincts and which caused them to substitute a set of definite reflexesinsteadall of this would be illustrative of the point that is here made.A similar tracing of the doctrine of wishes or of the neglect of physiologyby the psychoanalysts or of the rejection of mental elements by theG estaltians on the one hand and by m en like John D ewey on the other,with, in each case, quite different motives and quite different outcomesall these and other questions like them would add greatly to the interestof the story of the development of social psychology.For we are all social psychologists enough now to know that while itis not easy to get rid of our prejudices and predilections, it is possiblesometimes to know what they are, to know that we have them, to knowwhat our friends' prejudices are, and to make allowances for both theirs


14/21

x v i FOREW ORDand o urs. T he compulsive natu re of social or collective thou gh t is afactor of which we can always take account for the correcting of ourda ta . F or we are all children of our time, the scholar not least of all.Indeed, it might be contended that the scholar is most of all a child ofhis time . P erhaps he is the very voice of his time speaking for his group.It is the time become articulate in a single point.This, task of relating the author to his time and to his group insidethe time is not so great as it might seem, for there are not so manykinds of system as there are men who write about them . T here are farmore books than there are classes of books, and the scholars and authorsm ay be grouped and classified. M oreover, the groups and classes canbe related to each other.Social psychology as a definite discipline known by distinctive termsis relatively young, but it is old enough already to have many "schools."We have our partisans, our sectarian champions, our orthodoxies, andour heresies. T he ancient R omans used to find amusem ent in makingtheir captives fight real battles, and the crowd enjoyed it most when theslaughter was most fierce. And even in this little arena the student canwitness wars of words, the annihilating phrases, and the savage battlecries which show how hum an scholars are. H ere the alliances are acrossjurisdictional boundaries, and behaviorism, instinctivism, Gestaltism, andthe rest seek their allies in any cam p. W hat these schools are, whattheir claims are, and what shibboleths are required to membership withinthe company are matters not hard to learn, but their real significancerequires most careful interpretation and insight.When a science is sufficiently mature and advanced to have a clearconception of its problems and is able to organize its forces so as toatt ra ct them effectively, th ere are no schools. Schools of psychologyare the growing pains of the science. L eaders of the schools perform thesame function as fanatics in any sphere. T he fanatic in religious orpolitical or social life is one who calls attention to a neglected truth ordu ty by a strident exaggeration of its importance. T hey not only tendto become extremists, but they are also in danger of losing their scientifictemper, since the search for truth is suspended by the necessity forfighting. W arfare, however, whether of at tack or of defense, furnishesa pleasant excitement, an increase in loyalty, often also satisfying acertain welcome notoriety, no less satisfying for being short-lived.F or the partisan leader of a school of thoug ht there is little hope. H eusually digs into a "well-prepared position in the rear" from whichsecurity he defends himself according to his resources. B ut th e friendsof science need no t be disturbed. Indeed a tru ly scientific m ind, surely atruly scientific psychological mind, cannot allow itself to be disturbed. T heextremists, like the P harisees in the T estament, have received their reward.Fortunately life is short, and neither they nor their work shall endure.


15/21

FOREWORD xviiThe future is with the young who, listening to the confusing voices,

will not be able or willing to continue the one-sided emphases. Theywill see the few grains in the heap of chaff and salvage what they can.Even the disciples and students of a pundit have been known to questionhis claims of infallibility in his own lifetime.

Social psychology is not only new, vigorous, rapidly growing, andgreatly confused; it is also vitally important. The answers to thequestions that it asks are urgently needed. The unity of our culture isbroken; the confusion of tradition is by now proverbial; we are becomingaware of human nature, but we do not understand what it is. Thetraining of children, the discipline called education, the problem ofinefficiency, the control of vice, crime, poverty, and warthese problemsare present in a new and dreadful form. How does our human naturecome to be? Is it unchangeable, and if it can be altered, how? Whencecome our motives, our ambitions, and how may these be best conceivedand best directed?

We have discovered a new world, but we have not explored it yet,and our peace and success demand that we know it well. Social psy-chology is a name we give to this task. Dr. Karpf's book tells whatmen have declared when they came back from spying out the land.

Although this book was not written as a college textbook, like anythoroughly comprehensive and scholarly work in the field it will admi-rably serve such a purpose. Nowhere is there available any comparablesurvey of the contributions of modern scholarship in this field. Inaddition to such a use, the work will certainly find an eager audience instudents of social science, particularly those interested in economics andpolitics who wish to understand what is going on in this field and whatcharacterizes the leaders of thought today. Here the critical commentand comparison throw the views into sharp relief, and the historicalperspective of the various authors as treated by Dr. Karpf gives meaningand significance to what might otherwise seem unrelated and isolated.

The general reader who is interested in modern thought will par-ticularly appreciate the way in which the various trends are traced outand finally brought together in the concluding chapters. The authorhas brought to her task an exceptionally adequate training, a high andunwavering enthusiasm, and a thoroughness of competent scholarshipwhich will be appreciated by all who will have the privilege of readingher work.

ELLSWORTH FARIS.U N I V E R S I T Y OF C H I C A G O ,March, 1932.


16/21

A M E R I C A N S O C I A L P S Y C H O L O G YI N T R O D U C T I O N

Like most of the modern sciences of human behavior and social life,social psychology may be thought of as being both a very old and avery new field of endeavor. I t m ay on the one hand be viewed as avery old subject with a history extending back into remotest antiquity,or at any rate into the earliest period of systematic philosophical inquiry,and on the other hand, as is more frequently the case, it may be lookedupon as one of the most recent and least qualified claimants to recognitionamong the sisterhood of the modern sciences. T here is evidently groundfor bo th of these views. F or certainly man has always concerned himself,in one way or another, with the field of inquiry with which modern socialpsychology seeks to deal system atically and scientifically. T he practicalwisdom regarding human nature and social life which custom, legend,precept, and maxim have stored down the ages of human history and thereflective theorizing about these matters which the centuries of philo-sophical thought record are eloquent testimony of this fact.But certainly, again, social psychology viewed as a specialized fieldof scientific endeavor corresponding to the other modern psychologicaland social sciences is a very new development and it has as yet littleto commend it that is comparable to that which the better establishedsciences have to offer. T he very conception of social psychology as adistinctfieldof scientific investigation is comparatively recent as scientificdevelopment goes. In fact, it hardly extends back beyond th e middle ofthe nineteenth centu ry. I t is, however, only with the development ofsocial psychology in this more specialized sense that this survey is to beconcerned and, more specifically, only with those aspects of the move-ment which have had a more or less direct bearing on the developmentof social psychology in this coun try. I t is necessary to bear this limita-tion of treatment in mind from the outset. 1As stated above, the very conception of social psychology as a dis-tinct field of scientific investigation is a comparatively recent develop-

1 Surveys of earlier thought which have an historical interest for the socialpsychologist are available in the histories of both psychology and social thought.Consult, for instance, R A N D , The Classical Psychologists; BBE T T , A History of Psychol-ogy, vols . I , I I ; BOGABDUS, A History of Social Thought, C h a ps . I - X ; LICHTENBERGER,The Development of Social Theory, C h a p s . I - I X ; SOBOKIN, Contemporary SociologicalTheories, introductory sections. 1


17/21

2 AMERICAN SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGYm ent. A nd naturally enough, too. F or this conception had to aw aitnot only the emergence of modern naturalistic and scientific thoughtgenerally as applied to the study of human behavior but also the modernsociological movement.

F or centuries, as we know, the stu dy of m ental and social life remainedsubordinated to other than scientific interestsmetaphysical, political,religious, ethical. Such was the nature of theory concerning the subjectmatter of social psychology in the Greek period and throughout themiddle ages. D uring all this time there was, of course, m ental and socialphilosophy, but no social psychology in the sense of modern thought.And even after the study of mental and social life began to take form asdistinct fields of scientific investigation within the modern scientificera, the need for a social psychology still remained obscured for a longtime, by the development of psychology and psychological thoughtgenerally along introspective and decidedly individualistic lines. 1It was only as positivism and modern comparative and evolutionarythought, as reflected upon the background of nineteenth century demo-cratic tendencies, were preparing the setting for the modern sociologicalmovement that the need for a social psychology began to make itselffelt. As the sociological point of view gained ground, it gradually becameincreasingly apparent that the conventional individualistic interpretationof human behavior was inadequate and even wholly unadapted for theexplanation of the socially most significant aspects of human nature.The resulting intellectual unrest and widespread groping after moreadequate conceptions and methods in the investigation of human natureand social life are well-known background in the development of modernpsycho-social science. T his situation, in its general aspec ts, is to beassociated with the early stages of the modern social-psychologicalmovement as well as with related nineteenth century scientific develop-m ents. B ut more specifically, i t was not u ntil, with the progress ofevents, modern psychology set about to ally itself definitely with physi-ology and to take over the point of view and experimental techniqueof biological science as defined in distinctly individualistic terms, andsociology likewise began to define its interest in terms of the study ofobjective social organization, that the essential setting for the modernsocial-psychological movement was completed. W ith this tu rn ofevents, however, social psychology, as we are to be concerned with ithere, began definitely to emerge alongside of general psychology on theone hand and general sociology on the other. 2Because of the background of individualistic thought upon whichit began to take form, modern social-psychological thought got its first

1 See B R ETT, A History of Psychology, vols. I , I I .* See ibid., vol. I I , pp. 3 66-360, vol. I ll , pp. 286-296; BALDWIN, History of Ps ychol-

ogy, vol. II, pp. 126jf.;also MCDOUGALL, A n Introduction to Social Psychology, C h a p . I .


18/21

INTRODUCTION 3impulse from the side of the study of social life. In fact, the modernsocial-psychological movement was at first, quite na turally, but a particu-lar aspect of the larger sociological movement, with which it was oncommon ground in its protest against psychological individualism. Thedevelopment of social psychology, as we shall see, is thus intimatelybound up during the early period with the development of sociologyitself, though social-psychological thought has spread out from the firstfrom both psychological and sociological sources. It was natural thatin the general groping for a more adequate approach to the study of thesocial aspects of human behavior, sociology should attempt to extendits scope from the study of the objective side of social organization, whichwas its chief concern in the first instance, to the study of the personalside, with which, it began increasingly to appear, social organizationin its deeper human meaning is so intimately related. On the otherhand, it was to be expected also that psychology itself, once recognizingthe inadequacy of its purely individualistic approach for the study ofthe more complex aspects of mental life, should attempt to extend andmodify its point of view and methods in accordance with the new insight.Accordingly, modern social psychology is found developing fromboth of these directions and, in addition, closely connected with suchother related fields of thought as social anthropology, evolutionarybiology, and culture history. So far, social psychology has continued toremain, from the nature of its historical problems and its theoreticalbackground, most intimately bound up with sociology, to the extenteven of having fairly shifted the weight of emphasis in the latter scienceto the consideration of its own problems.1 But this fact has not inter-fered with its natural association all along also with psychology and,especially during its early history, also with certain aspects of anthro-pology and folk psychology, which, as will appear in the early part ofthis survey, has in some instances amounted to the practical identifica-tion of social psychology with portions of these relatedfieldsof endeavor.This interlinking of social psychology with related fields of scientificinvestigation, together with the intensely nationalistic character ofnineteenth century thought generally and of psycho-social thought inparticular,2 has been favorable for the more or less particularistic cultiva-tion of distinct angles of approach in the field and for the crystallizationof those differentiated tendencies of social-psychological development,which today define the field of social psychology. So far, too, theseseveral directions of social-psychological development have remainedlargely uncoordinated from the social-psychological standpoint. We

1 For an early statement on this point, see Ellwood, Proc. Intern. Congress ArtsSci., vol. 5, p. 859, 1904.* See M B R Z , History of European Thought in the Nineteenth Ce ntury, vol. IV, pp.429-430, 447-448.


19/21

4 AM ERIC AN S OC IAL PSYCHOLOGYfind, therefore, that each of them has been held up, and in fact continuesto be held up, as the social psychology, more or less without regard orrelation to the other claimants for this designation. T his situatio n,as may be readily imagined, is frequently confusing, especially to theinterested general reader in the field and the beginning student, who,when confronted with the several current treatises, each of them pur-porting to deal with th e subject of social psychology without modification,are frequently at a loss to make out the connections between them andto explain their diversity of conception and material. T hu s, in thiscountry, the two best known and probably most popular works, Ross*Social Psychology a n d M c D o u g a ll 's , A n Introduction to Social P sychology,seem hardly, as it has frequently been pointed out, to be concerned withthe same subject m atter. A nd those who are acquainted also with theconceptions of Cooley, M ead, E llwood, D ewey, and T hom as, to mentiononly the older and more widely recognized attempts to formulate social-psychological theory in this country, know that each of these is againessentially distinct from both of the above as well as from each other.It has been considerations of this nature and the consequent con-viction that there is at the present time an urgent need in the field ofsocial psychology for some sort of general survey, in the light of whichthe various current treatments and conceptions of the subject may begiven place in relation to each other and to the field in its larger outlinesas it has developed in its several aspects up to the present time, that haveprom pted this work. I t is hoped th at th e survey of social-psychologicalthought which is to be followed out here will help to meet this need in apreliminary way. In particular, it is hoped th at the development ofAmerican social-psychological thought will appear in significant per-spective in this treatment of the subject and that, at least in so far associal-psychological endeavor in this country is concerned, it will helpclear the ground for those more positive tendencies in the field which aretoday variously beginning to get under way here, and upon which thefurther advance of such a scientifically applicable social psychologyas has been the objective of American social-psychological thought fromthe beginning must from now on squarely rest.


20/21

PART IEUROPEAN BACKGROUND


21/21

American Social Psychology

Documents

Transcript of American Social Psychology