Proliferation of Western Methodological Thought in Psychology in Japan: Ways of Objectification

Abstract

When the field of psychology was first introduced into Japan, it was based on the proliferation of Western thought, particularly experimentation and Darwinian evolutionary theory. The current Japanese word for psychology, shinrigaku, was coined by scholar Amane Nishi in the early 1870s. It originally meant "mental philosophy," not psychology. Nishi also translated "subject" and "object" into Japanese. Before that, objectivity was not a concept in Japan. And although psychological experimentation must have prompted the subject/object division, experiments did not take root in Japanese psychology until Yujiro Motora, considered the founder of Japanese psychology, established the first psychological laboratory in 1903 at the University of Tokyo. In regards to Darwinian evolutionary theory, it is likely that scholars (e.g., biologists, sociologists, politicians) more readily accepted the theory when introduced into Japanese society in the 1870s because Japanese embrace a view that maintains diffuse boundaries between humans and animals. Finally, the roles of Japanese scholars who studied abroad during of the inception of psychology in Japan are discussed.

Beyond Dichotomy—Towards Creative Synthesis

“…Psychology in Japan before the Meiji Restoration (feudal era) should be separated from what we now call psychology (Sato 2002: 33-35) and Takasuna (2007) agree this view. But the story was not about a single trajectory of "importing psychology from the Western."…”

Cognitive Frames in Psychology: Demarcations and Ruptures

“…However, even in the absence of an Iron Curtain, the social and cultural features of psychological science in different countries are very pronounced. For example, this science in Japan reveals some striking differences from its West European or North American counterparts (Takasuna 2007). In turn, West European, for example GermanAustrian, psychology differs from that in North America (Toomela 2007, and the popular thesis that science has no national borders, while useful in ideological terms, significantly distorts the true state of affairs when applied to social and humanitarian disciplines.…”