PSYCHOLOGY AND COMMON SENSE:
A main point of difference relates to the terminology employed in psychology. The reader as he goes through this volume will find that many of the terms employed in psychology are not different from those employed in everyday life. Examples of such terms are learning, remembering, motivation, need, personality etc. This often gives the impression to the reader that psychology is nothing but the use of common sense. This impression is sometimes also strengthened by some of the findings reported by psychologists. For example, when a textbook of psychology states, in a highly pompous manner that efficiency of learning depends on practice, the reader rightly wonders what is so profound about this statement.
At the same time the reader also gets the opposite feeling that psychologists often indulge in unnecessary jargon trying to introduce complex explanations for very simple phenomena. Thus, it is often said that a psychologist tries to make a mountain of a molehill. To a certain extent perhaps, the reader is justified in getting this feeling. But at the same time it is necessary that he gets over these feelings and develops a right appreciation of the subject.
Science deals with ordinary phenomena. Events and occurrences which are common and part of our everyday life have the first claim on the scientist’s attention since ultimately scientific knowledge should help to improve life on this planet. If this is so, it is only right that psychology should be dealing with common occurrences and what appears to be common sense. At the same time what is common need not necessarily be simple. A scientist studies and investigates common events but does it analytically and systematically. In view of this, his or her conceptualization often has to be more precise, systematic and analytical compared to that of a layperson. Further, when a psychologist studies a process like learning, he or she has to do this taking into account other processes like motivation, remembering etc. While learning appears to be a simple and unitary process to the layperson, this is not so from a scientific point of view. Thus, the reader will find that the psychologist has coined a term like “reinforcement” to explain the relationship between learning and motivation. Let us take a simple example from chemistry. To the layperson, water is just water but to a chemist it is H20(two atoms of hydrogen and one of oxygen). The layperson’s approach is experiential while the scientist’s approach is explanatory. The latter has to explain the experiences of the former and to achieve this, the language of the former is often found inadequate. The reader will now understand why he gets the feeling that psychology appears to be just common-sense and at the same time confusing.
Yet another point that may be mentioned is as follows. Many of us will be ready to admit that we do not know anything of physics or chemistry or geology even though these sciences also deal with things around us. But when it comes to psychology most people grudge admitting their ignorance. We feel bad about admitting that we are totally ignorant about ourselves. Everyone of us feels that he or she is some sort of a psychologist. It is this fact which often makes us feel that we know psychology and the psychologists don’t. It is a difficult proposition to be objective about oneself and observe ourselves as we observe things around us. Unfortunately, unlike other sciences, the science of psychology has to confront this self-assumed wisdom people ascribe to themselves. The reader will be able to overcome his reservations once he realizes this and overcomes this subjectivism
Dr. Amit Kumar Sharma
Assistant Professor,
Department of Psychology,
Mewar University,
Chittaurgarh, Rajasthan. India
Comments
Post a Comment