Philosophy v Psychology

Philosophy and psychology share intertwined histories yet represent distinct approaches to understanding the human experience. Philosophy, the ancient and foundational discipline, explores profound questions about existence, reality, knowledge, and ethics. Philosophers engage in abstract reasoning and critical thinking to analyze concepts, often delving into debates about consciousness, morality, and the nature of reality. Philosophy operates on a theoretical level, focusing on conceptual exploration and reasoning. Throughout history, philosophical inquiries laid the groundwork for the study of the mind and behavior, providing the philosophical underpinnings upon which psychology would emerge.

In contrast, psychology emerged as a separate scientific discipline in the late 19th century, building upon the philosophical inquiries of earlier scholars. In the 19th century, figures like Wilhelm Wundt and William James are often credited with establishing psychology as a separate discipline. Wundt, for instance, founded the first psychological laboratory in 1879 in Leipzig, Germany, where he conducted experiments to study the elements of human consciousness. James, in the United States, wrote the influential book "The Principles of Psychology" in 1890, which helped establish psychology as a formal academic discipline.

Rooted in empirical observation and experimentation, psychology employs rigorous scientific methods to study human thought, emotion, and behavior. Psychologists use experiments, surveys, and observations to gather data, aiming to understand the underlying mechanisms that govern human actions. While philosophy contemplates abstract questions, psychology employs empirical evidence and data-driven approaches to explore topics such as perception, memory, and social behavior. Despite their shared historical roots, philosophy and psychology represent distinct methodologies—one characterized by theoretical inquiry and abstract reasoning, the other by empirical investigation and scientific observation.

Existence, Essence and when Hell is other people

Existence Precedes Essence & Bad Faith

"Existence precedes essence" is a fundamental idea in Jean-Paul Sartre's existentialism philosophy. It means that individuals are not defined by any inherent nature or purpose, but rather by the choices we make and the actions we take.

According to Sartre, human beings have complete freedom and responsibility for their own lives and must create their own meaning and values. This is in contrast to traditional philosophical views, which often hold that individuals have an inherent nature or purpose that determines their actions and choices. Essentially, the concept of "existence precedes essence" highlights the importance of individual freedom and responsibility in shaping one's own identity and purpose.

The idea of "existence precedes essence" is closely linked to Sartre's concept of "bad faith," which refers to the denial of one's own freedom and responsibility. When individuals act in bad faith, they try to escape their own freedom and responsibility by blaming external factors or by denying their own choices and actions.

Hell is other People

"Hell is other people" is a phrase from Jean-Paul Sartre's play "No Exit," in which the character Garcin utters the phrase in response to the realization that he is doomed to spend eternity in a room with two other people. The phrase has come to be widely recognized as a reference to the idea that other people can be a source of suffering or torment, either because of their actions or simply because of their presence. Sartre's play is a commentary on the human condition and the ways in which people interact with one another, and the phrase "hell is other people" captures the sense of frustration and despair that can arise in relationships with others.