“WHAT can men do, what do they do, and what do they want to do ?”—these are the uestions that Prof. Thorndike seeks to answer in a very comprehensive and elaborate treatise. His undertaking is inspired by the belief that man has the possibility of almost complete control of his fate if only he will be guided by science, and that his failures are attributable to ignorance or folly. The main approach is through biological psychology, but all the social sciences are appealed to and utilized in an effort to deal with the human problem as a whole. The relative immaturity of the sciences dealing with man is continually stressed, but it is claimed that they provide a body of facts and principles which are “far above zero knowledge”, and that even now they are capable of affording valuable guidance in the shaping of public policy. Human Nature and the Social Order By E. L. Thorndike. Pp. xx + 1020. (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1940.) 18s. net.

Human Nature and the Social Order

THIS is a single volume, easy to handle and read, containing explanations of philosophical terms and outline accounts of schools of thought, special subjects and individual thinkers. It looks as though the efforts of a number of specialists had been put together in alphabetical order with little editing. Many of the articles are just right; for example, that on ‘Hegelianism’, and most of the definitions of Aristotelian terms. A few articles are too brief for clarity; many are too long and try to do too much. The Dictionary of Philosophy Edited by Dagobert D. Runes. Pp. viii + 343. (London: George Routledge and Sons, Ltd., 1944.) 27s. 6d. net.

The Dictionary of Philosophy

https://science.sciencemag.org/content/sci/72/1873/529.full.pdf

A History of Experimental Psychology

A TEXTBOOK OF PSYCHOLOGY. By D. 0. Hebb. Philadelphia and London, W. B. Saunders Co., 1958. 276 pp. $4.50. The large and heterogeneous collection of books written over the past fifteen years for the first course in psychology can be fitted rather loosely into two categories-the encyclopedic and the systematic. At their worst, the \"encyclopedic\" text is merely sprawling and the \"systematic\" merely personal, but a good defense can be presented for both ways of introducing the undergraduate to a field as various as psychology. Professor Hebb has thrown his weight to the systematic side with a short and cleanly written exposition of his technique for comprehending behavioral data. Drawing on the theoretical position presented in his Organization of Behavior, he has brought into articulation such usually diverse topics as perception, maturation, thinking, and motivation. He manages this task of integration with wit and modesty, and without surrendering to the students' fear of physiological detail. More than this, he accepts much of the layman's language and leads the student past the pitfalls of \"mind,\" \"thought,\" \"consciousness,\" and \"imagery\" by thoughtful analysis rather than by wholesale rejection of such terms. This respect for Everyman's point of view, together with his tendency to present empirical findings in a condensed narrative free of tables and graphs, will win friends for Professor Hebb among students, but such reasonableness may make it difficult to convince these students that they need to revise the versions of psychology they bring to the first class. This is the paradox of Professor Hebb's book. He demands a great deal of the student in his treatment of neurophysiological hypotheses (for example, 36 of 78 figures detail the nervous system and its function), but he does not tamper too much with their other preconceptions about behavior (for example, there is scarce mention of psychoanalysis, social, psychology, or clinical methods, and a slim 25 pages are given to the vast field of learning). Perhaps the encyclopedists have a point-a dry recitation of empirical results does not charm or persuade, but it permits the teacher to advance his speculative integrations from a comparatively firm base. The systematic or personal textbook of psychology, in 1958, at any rate, may set undesirable boundaries on the first student's appreciation of the complex tasks psychologists face. Valuable as it is in presenting a coherent point of view, Professor Hebb's treatment of psychology can be used effectively as a primary textbook in the first course only by teachers already committed to his view of psychology.

Treatment of the Child in Emotional Conflict

Various streams of organizational research have examined the relationship between creativity and leadership, albeit using slightly different names such as “creative leadership”, “leading for creativity and innovation”, and “managing creatives”. In this article, we review this dispersed body of knowledge and synthesize it under a global construct of creative leadership, which refers to leading others toward the attainment of a creative outcome. Under this unifying construct, we classify three more narrow conceptualizations that we observe in the literature: facilitating employee creativity; directing the materialization of a leader's creative vision; and integrating heterogeneous creative contributions. After examining the contextual characteristics associated with the three conceptualizations, we suggest that they represent three distinct collaborative contexts of creative leadership. We discuss the theoretical implications of a multi-context framework of creative leadership, especially in terms of resolving three persisting problems in the extant literature: lack of definitional clarity, shortage of nuanced theories, and low contextual sensitivity.

/pdf/creative-leadership-a-multi-context-conceptualization-2supa2hmwc.pdf

Creative Leadership: A Multi-Context Conceptualization†

Can we say that scholars, scientists, and other intellectuals are free—apart from ideological and motivational constraints—to choose their professional and personal Weltanschauungen? This essay cla...

Toward a psychology of knowledge: hypotheses regarding Rorschach movement and creativity.

I have interpreted a recent Saturday Review article (1) most specifically, as a new variation on the theme of anti-psychometrics, (2) less specifically, as a new manifestation of humanistic dissatisfaction with scientific psychology, and (3) generally, as a protest from Snow's “traditional culture” regarding who in our society shall be called intellectually great. The variation involves attacking aptitude tests of creativity for their failure to measure aptitude for artistic creativity. I have suggested that the movement dimension of the Rorschach test does precisely this—although it does not measure what the Guilford originality tests measure, namely, aptitude for unusual, remote, and/or clever response. This aptitude is relatively independent of Rorschach's “capacity for ‘inner creation’,” a capacity which must be well above-average to qualify as a genius in Romantic terms. Because this independence has long been recognized by Romanticism, it is to be expected that an abundance of the Guilford aptitude ...

An essay on romantic genius, rorschach movement, and the definition of creativity.

-The paper is one of a series dealing with role-taking (empathy) and Rorschach movement responses. Previously, positive correlation was suggested between role-taking (empathy) in its intuitional sense, feeling, experience in its Erlebnis sense, and Rorschach movement response. In this paper the suggestion is expanded to include drama in the sense of the dramatic arts and what is defined as dramatic dreaming. The claim is made that a species incapable of Rorschachian inner creation is a species incapable of Stanislavskian acting, spectator empathy as defined by Langfeld and Jarrert, mimesis as discussed by Plato, make-believe (vision) as defined by Hoffer, and night dreaming as defined by Dement, Foulkes, and other researchers.

Suggestion regarding drama, inner creation, and role-taking (empathy). I. Dramatic arts and dramatic dreaming.

-Drawing on contributions by H. Bergson, J. P. Guilford, A. 0. Lovejoy, H. Rorschach, J. Ruesch and W. Kees, H. A. Simon, J. L. Singer and J. S. Antrobus, and G. L. S. Shackle, the essay develops a cognitive dualism involving, on the one hand, Guilford's perceptual foresight, Simon's foresight, Bergson's intellect, Romantic Idealism's Verstand, Rorschach form responses, Singer and Antrobus' objective daydreaming, and Ruesch .ind Kees' digital codific a t i o n a n d , on the other, Guilford's conceptual \o~esrghc, Shackle's foresight, Bergson's intttifion, Romantic Idealism's Vernunft (Vernunfc-Anschauung, intellekluelle Anschauung), Rorschach movement responses, Singer and Anrrobus' subjective daydreaming, and Ruesch and Kees' analogic codification.

TOWARD A PSYCHOLOGY OF KNOWLEDGE: II. TWO KINDS OF FORESIGHT AND FORESIGHT THEORIZING Monograph Supplement 4-V23

This paper is the third of a series intended to relate Ferdinand Toennies' distinction between Gemeinschaft and Gesellschaft (and all comparable distinctions in social theory) to the difference between (1) intuitional and inferential role-taking (empathy), (2) Erlebnis and Erfahrung experience, and (3) Rorschachian inner creation (movement repsonses) and Rorschachian rationality (form responses). The paper interprets Charles Horton Cooley's concepts of “social” knowledge (or sympathy-as-communion) and “spatial” (“material”) knowledge as intuitional and inferential, respectively. It therefore clusters “social” knowledge with Gemeinschaft, Erlebnis, and inner creation; and “spatial” knowledge with Gesellschaft, Erfahrung, and rationality. The paper treats also of George Herbert Mead's concept of “attitude-taking.” It considers Mead to have confounded intuition and inference, with the result that contemporary Meadians may mean qualitatively different psychological processes when they speak of “role-taking” o...

Stanley Stark

Papers

Toward a psychology of knowledge: hypotheses regarding Rorschach movement and creativity.

An essay on romantic genius, rorschach movement, and the definition of creativity.

Suggestion regarding drama, inner creation, and role-taking (empathy). I. Dramatic arts and dramatic dreaming.

TOWARD A PSYCHOLOGY OF KNOWLEDGE: II. TWO KINDS OF FORESIGHT AND FORESIGHT THEORIZING Monograph Supplement 4-V23

Gemeinschaft, Inner Creation, and Role-Taking (Empathy): III. Charles Horton Cooley on “Social” vs “Spatial” (“Material”) Knowledge: