What are organicism and mechanism in psychology

In psychology, there are two different currents to address the difficulties that arise in the study and explanation of the behavior: organicism and mechanism. The explanation of the first is fundamentally nature, while, for the second, it is fundamentally learning. In this context, we find two different explanations, therefore, two possible interventions, which are also radically different.

These two currents date back to antiquity, emerging from the darkness of Greek thought and that, at present, are two forms of thought and intervention. Organicism and mechanism were formulated in Greek philosophy and extend through all Western thought. Socrates, Plato and Aristotle imposed their theories and principles on those of Democritus and Epicurus, proposing a theory with the ability to Describe the order of nature until the seventeenth century.

Then, Descartes and Newton proposed the basis for the strengthening of mechanism, principles that coincided with the technical and scientific advances of the Great Industrial Revolution. In the twentieth century, with the scientific revolution, the Mechanism was placed as the dominant current of current thought, despite the fact that quantum theory has demonstrated the limitations of this thought and Biology findings have shown us aspects linked to organicism.

The optimal would be an explanatory model that allowed to combine the various aspects of mechanism and organicism a new synthesis, which allowed us to create a new integrating paradigm, but this is not going to happen, even less with the current reductionism existing in the Sciences and, from what concerns us, in health sciences.

Both contribute concepts that are irreducible to each other, because they suppose radically different conceptions about man and human development.

Content

• Mechanism
• Organicism
• Is an integration of both perspectives possible?
  • Bibliographic references

Mechanism

The mechanistic model presents a very basic system, similar to the operation of a machine (Barberis, 2012). That machine, human development metaphor, moves according to certain laws that function as an efficient cause of the corresponding behaviors linked to development. Each of the pieces of this machine has its function, being able to predetermine the operation from the operation of each of its parts.

For epicurus and democrito philosophers, closest history of behaviorism, neo -conductism and learning theories, the organism would be passive in the construction of the real, and all knowledge would come through learning (Silva, 2007). The organism is reactive, without prior knowledge, and will not be imposed on reality at all except what reality has been imposed.

Coll (1979) points out some principles shared by mechanistic theories:

1. The important thing is the visible and external, that is, the observable behavior.
2. Learning is reduced to a Progressive substitution of stimuli and responses.
3. Is most important the smallest and molecular that broad and molar.
4. This leads to defining the personality as chain or hierarchy of reflexes and habits.
5. Consider that The processes observed in the analysis of animal behaviors are coinciding with the basic units of human behavior.
6. They suppose that The first exterior impressions about the body are the most important: "Simple and original ideas constitute the basis of later mental life and, in this sense, they condition it strongly".
7. They do not admit more variable and concepts in psychology that those that can be defined operationally, that is, that can be reduced to Observable data.

Organicism

If the metaphor or representation of the mechanistic model is a machine, that of the organicist model would be Any living, active and organized organism (Brá, 2012). The object of study must be analyzed in its complexity and in its principles of organization already given. The study of each of the parts of the organism or the object to be investigated, will not give us information about the whole of quality and quantity.

The origin in philosophy is based on the Platonic postulates, continues in Leibnitz, and continues in the Central European associations; In its psychological references the theory of gestalt and the Piagetian hypotheses would be framed.

Development is raised as follows: There is a structure that is changing according to a scheme in large part linked to nature, and, in response to a surrounding world, compared to which it behaves like a Active organism (Brá, 2012). The change happens in stages, occurring qualitative changes Among the different development phases.

It should be noted that the organicist model is at the base of most development theories, from psychoanalysis, to Piaget's theory or Bowlby's postulates.

Is an integration of both perspectives possible?

Today it is necessary to study and analysis of mental processes as much as possible before intervening on them, so having different perspectives is important. Even so, thanks to the numerous studies of the last decades, we also know that it is essential to study each case as unique and special, to make a personal evaluation to make decisions. Starting from a general statistic or model, as mechanism does, for all, it is a position too reductionist, since it is affirmed that absolutely all problems are caused by learning, without also providing any study that verifies it.

Therefore, Place yourself in front of both methods and inform themselves about them is a necessary alternative, Before choosing blind. The mechanistic position It has fewer time costs, but psychic costs may appear, in addition to being a strategy against nature; he Organicist approach It can be more laborious, and can leave us without concrete strategies, but is considered as a more human and natural, more empathic position (Huertas, 1997).

The general recommendation would be to assess whether the problem is learning for that particular person or is not. If it is, methods of "training" will be carried out but, if it is not, natural intervention methods will be established, as far as possible. Although they are more expensive, they are more reassuring for the person.

Change position, Knowing that we are talking from knowledge or paradigms, gives us the strength of abstract thinking, of the highest and most genuinely human thinking Without being subject and confined to the most net reality, in front of which we only have the figures struggles.

What is psychology and its main approaches

Bibliographic references

• Barberis, s. D. (2012). A critical analysis of the mechanistic conception of the explanation. Latin American Magazine of Philosophy, 38(2), 233-265. http: // www.Scielo.org.AR/SCIELO.PHP?Pid = S1852-73532012000200004 & script = sci_arttext & tlng = pt
• Bá, m. Yo. TO. (2012). Around a historical reconstruction of complexity: organicism, power regime and new technological sciences. Nomads. Critical Journal of Social and Juridical Sciences, 33(1). https: // www.Redalyc.org/pdf/181/18123129010.PDF
• Coll, c. (1979). The concept of development in evolutionary psychology: epistemological aspects. Childhood and learning, 2(7), 60-73. https: // doi.org/10.1080/02103702.1979.10821751
• Huertas, j. TO. (1997). Motivation. Aique.
• Silva, c. (2007). Skepticism, mechanism, theology and alchemy in Robert Boyle. Theory. Magazine of the College of Philosophy. http: // hdl.Handle.Net/10391/2490