Whither
Psychology?
BY K. GURU DUTT
It is usual to say that psychology is the youngest
among the sciences. But in a sense psychology is the oldest of the sciences.
There is good reason for holding that, even in the earliest reaches of human
history, man was preoccupied with the workings of his own mind and had learnt
how to apply his findings, and primitive man was not concerned only, or even
chiefly, with objective matters. On the other hand, he saw mind everywhere in
the Universe, an attitude which it has been usual in recent times to designate
by the somewhat deprecatory title of animism. His findings were, however, not
embodied in theories and principles so much as in myths, legends and
allegories, and in the whole vast realm of art, ritual and religion. Subsequent
developments in the Course of the great ancient civilizations are well-known,
although it is to be feared that they have not been given their due weight by
moderns.
With the renascence of science in its modern guise
three or four centuries ago, the stress was shifted on definitely to the outer
world. The success of the experimental method in these regions was so
phenomenal that the method has come to be regarded as almost sacrosanct. The
resulting view of the universe was a mechanistic one, and at its basis were the
so-called “laws of nature” which explained nature’s obvious uniformities. The
same method was sought to be applied to biology and latterly to psychology
also. Its success in the former field was, however, not so marked as in the region
of the physical sciences, and, as a result, non-mechanistic hypotheses have had
to be adopted by many investigators, and have been fruitful. This is all the
more the case in the region of psychology where the purely mechanistic
experimental methods wherever applicable have no doubt yielded results to
match, but have not taken us very far towards understanding the fundamental
problems. There has thus been scope for the greatest variety of opinion even as
regards basic concepts. The problem has been further complicated by the fact
that the latest findings of the physical sciences themselves do not support a
mechanistic determinism, such, for example, as fully satisfied a man like
Huxley at the close of the last century. Today the barriers between mind, matter
and energy have broken down, as it were, and it would require a very bold
imagination indeed to predict what the future has in store for us in these
directions.
If we restrict our attention solely to modern
psychology itself, we find that the old intellectualist view has been
altogether abandoned. In its place a dynamic conception of the mind has been
practically universally accepted. Mind is no longer regarded as a mere
epiphenomenon, but rather as something geared on to the body, and through the body
to the external world. The phenomena of the interaction of mind and body,
although known from times immemorial, were apt to be dismissed with scant
courtesy as faith cures by the older psychologists. However, in the recent
past, the facts which have come to light as a result of the systematic study of
hypnosis, suggestion, trance conditions, hysteria and other abnormal but
perfectly natural and common conditions have convinced psychologists that mind
is connected with a vast hidden source of energy. Most psychologists have
agreed on the name libido to designate this mind-energy.
The chief fact which came to the forefront as a
result of these investigations was that the reservoir of this energy was in a
region of which we are ordinarily unaware. It would appear as if our mind is
like an iceberg, the greater bulk of which is submerged below the threshold of
consciousness. The credit of drawing attention to the workings of the
subconscious or unconscious mind belongs to Freud, the Viennese psychologist,
who passed away recently in England, an exile from his native country. His
achievement in the region of psychology has been compared by so competent a
judge as MacDougall to that of Newton in Physics, an achievement independent of
the actual fate of his working hypotheses such as repression, the Oedipus
complex, the pleasure and reality principles and the like. The work begun by
Freud was carried on by a host of famous investigators like Jung and Adler who
have put forward very plausible rival hypotheses of their own. These are not
mere speculations but are actually being daily used by these investigators in
their clinical practice, and, it is claimed, with success.
The fundamental differences in theory coupled with
empirical success are things which have intrigued many scientists who are used
to the cut and dried methods of the physical sciences, where the latest
successful hypothesis generally discredits and ousts its predecessors. In
physics, except perhaps in the recent researches connected with Relativity,
there seems to be little scope for option. On the other hand, in psychology,
everything seems to be a matter of option. It is therefore being asserted by
some that psychology has not yet assumed the status of a science. If by this is
meant that it has not attained the rigidity of the physical sciences, it is
only too true. It is unlikely that it ever will. It is just dawning on the
minds of a very few investigation that psychology may require a method of its
own, which may radically differ from the orthodox scientific method. It may
even be said that psychology will not come into its own, unless it declares its
independence and serves the umbilical chord which connects it with the physical
sciences.
What is of the greatest interest to us is the fact
that the results of the most modern investigations are very much in a line with
the time-honoured findings of the great religions and mythologies. The rigid
logic of solid matter which works so well in the world of physical science does
not apparently hold undisputed sway in the region of mind. Man’s imagination,
which seems to form the core of his living and creative mind, seems to have a
logic of its own, which is more to be discovered in the working of dreams and
visions than in dealings with inanimate matter. The practical effects of this
new orientation have been of far reaching consequence. It has altered our
attitude towards mental abnormality, whether it be in the shape of insanity or
of the host of vital social problems like crime and education. The success of
the physical sciences has placed an enormous amount of mechanical power in
man’s hands which only too often finds its outlet in undesirable channels like
war. The prevention of such phenomena is a thing which is closely connected
with the training of man’s mind and emotions, and not on the accumulation of
external information. The great modern plagues are all of a psychical nature
and can be cured only in the minds of people. For this, the hope does not lie
in mechanism but only in personality. The solution lies not in the region of
inanimate nature or energy (prakriti), on the control of which man is
now priding himself and comparing himself to his own advantage with
pre-scientific man, but in the sphere of personality or purusha. The
mighty civilizations of old seem to have been not only greatly concerned with
this region but also to have achieved a large measure of success. It is up to
us to use their sane and balanced findings, adapting them, of course, to modern
requirements. There need not be any slavish submission to tradition or
authority, nor is it necessary to suppose that the ancients had exhausted all
the secrets of mind. There is nothing to prevent us from experimenting and
finding out new things for ourselves. But we would be wise if we make a
judicious use of the lore of the ancients. There is scope for criticism,
provided it is made with respect and humility. Today I am putting forward a
plea for a reverent study of the ancient literature on the subject. The great
secrets and tried methods are there, but not all on the surface. Like the
ancients, we may yet unravel in solitude, and through meditation, the live
strands which form the warp and woof of mind. Man’s mind which is the kernel of
his inmost being, cherished and nourished by the five senses, like Draupadi by
her five husbands, will never be exposed in public!