Discussion 5,

For this weeks discussion, continue tracking ancient ideologies in current practices of care as you did in last weeks discussion, just choose a different concept or ideology to discussion from last weeks choice.

Stevens
RESPOND TO MAIN POST
Manage Discussion Entry

The field of psychology has taken many forms throughout history. The many faces of psychology results not only from the times of the investigation but also from the cultures being examined. From this, Lamont (2010) considers the field of psychology as reflective (Lamont, 2010). These truths make it ever more important that we study this history, in order to appreciate how the field changed over time and how we our current knowledge structure developed over time.
The development of mental and spiritual experiences during the European middle ages provides us insight into certain developments in the field. When it comes to memories and the impact of experience there was the regular use of the wax tablet metaphor; the idea that the man (of course we have to discuss men here, considering the reflective nature of the field) is a wax block, and as new experiences are had then an imprint of the experience is left as would be left by a seal within wax. The wax tablet metaphor was used the likes of Aristotle, Plato, St Augustine, and Nemesis (400AD)(Kemp, 1998). What is more, there were early predictions that the senses and even certain elements of reason could be located within certain subsections of the brain, while others assumed that these functionalities lied outside of the brain, within the spirit (Kemp, 1998).
To build on the discussion of spirit, or even spiritual/mystical experiences, we might look back and consider the devout religious individuals with condemnation from todays perspective (waging wars in the name of God, self-mutilation, and clear signs of fanaticism). But there was a distinction made between a mystical/spiritual experience and mental disorders, and there is clear evidence that people of the times were able to make the distinction themselves (Kemp, 2019). The roots of many of our modern psychological terminology find their roots in early European languages (non compos mentis, non sane mentis, furiosus, insanus, mania)(Kemp, 2019). At the time, there was the clear distinction of the brain and intellect, and while there was the distinction that the brain and intellect were entities in themselves, there is the indication there was an understanding that brain might play a powerful role in the behavior of someone with a mental disorder. However, mental disorders, spiritual experiences, and intellect/reasoning wasnt left entirely to the brain. If there were specific issues within the individual it would also be considered that the intellect suffered the inability to use the brain properly (Neugebauer, 1978).
As time went on, wed gain great insights into the functioning of the brain and its relationship to psychological processes. We should appreciate, though, that while they were not necessarily accurate in their assumptions of this relationship in the middle ages, that modernity isnt better for their early postulations (Lamont, 2010).

REFERENCES
Kemp, S. (1998). Medieval theories of mental representation. History of Psychology, 1(4), 275-288. doi:http://dx.doi.org.tcsedsystem.idm.oclc.org/10.1037/1093-4510.1.4.275
Kemp, S. (2019). Mental disorder and mysticism in the late medieval world. History of Psychology, 22(2), 149-162. doi:http://dx.doi.org.tcsedsystem.idm.oclc.org/10.1037/hop0000121
Lamont, P. (2010). Reflexivity, the role of history, and the case of mesmerism in early Victorian Britain. History of Psychology, 13(4), 393-408. doi:http://dx.doi.org.tcsedsystem.idm.oclc.org/10.1037/a0019867
Neugebauer, R. (1978). Treatment of the mentally ill in medieval and early modern England: A reappraisal. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 14, 158 169.