|
|
International
Psychohistorical Association
Introduction:
If
you have ever read a history book, wondered why this or that event
occurred as it did and felt frustrated because the writer either did
not address this question or seemed unconvincing, then psychohistory
might be for you. Traditional modes of historical explanation tend
to emphasize political, social, economic, cultural, or intellectual
motivations for events & actions. These are fine as far as they
go, but how well do they really explain why humans behave in a given
way in a given event? In psychohistory we are always mindful that
history is made by men & women evolving from the past into the
present on their way to the future. Psychohistorians ask why men/women
behave as they do in history, thus we are always drawn back to the
role of individual/shared emotion & fantasy as a major explanatory
factor in history, just as it is in our present lives. The more traditional
fields tend to ignore or downplay this aspect of human history. We
have been accused of being reductionistic by some, this is not true;
rather we believe and know that we are paying attention to the real
basics. Of necessity, ours is an interdisciplinary field. It would
be a mistake to assume that we seek to replace or usurp the insights
of more traditional disciplines. Quite the contrary, we use the insights
of many fields to build from, we could not exist without what has
gone before.
We may define psychohistory as the interdisciplinary study of why
man has acted the way he has in history, prominently utilizing psychoanalytic
principles.
As of yet there are no formal training programs for psychohistorians,
courses are taught here and there by such scholars as Peter Loewenberg,
David Beisel, Rudolph Binion, Paul Elovitz, Jerrold Atlas, Charles
Strozier, and a few others. Thus, psychohistorians are essentially
self-taught, which is one reason why a group such as IPA can be important
for the growth of the field. IPA has taken over the On-Line Training
Course that had existed and is in the process of redesigning it to
hopefully make it more relevant for the needs of interested scholars.
Further information will be posted on our Web Site, as it becomes
available. Ideally, the psychohistorian should be trained in both
history and psychoanalysis. Most of us are usually trained in one
or the other & many have no formal training in either area. Thus,
psychohistorical scholarship is somewhat variable in quality and quite
eclectic in character. But our work is seldom dull and often provocative.
Not everyone can or should aspire to be a psychohistorian. You should
feel comfortable going beyond disciplinary boundaries. You need a
certain amount of extra imagination to ferret out the unusual source
or find information in unexpected places. You should not be afraid
of new ideas, nor should you be afraid to use your feelings in the
service of understanding. You need to have a well developed sense
of curiosity. Psychohistorians are not special people, we are fallible
just like anyone else, but we do share an abiding desire to want to
know why, always why....
There are three inter-related areas of psychohistorical study.
- History
of Childhood:
Here we look at such questions as how have children been raised
throughout history, how has the family been constituted, how &
why has it changed over time, the place & value of children
in society over time, how & why our views of child abuse and
neglect have changed, why there is still such denial about the reality
of child abuse, etc. We pay such attention to childhood because
it is there that much of the groundwork for our future emotional
development is created. Thus, if we are to understand our emotional
development, how & why it has changed over time, we need to
better comprehend the history childhood.
- Psychobiography:
Here we seek to understand individual historical people and their
motivations in history. This is not as simple as it may sound. Psychobiography
involves understanding a person's emotional growth, their personal,
family, and societal relations, the time in which the person lives,
and how all of these interact to allow the person to have an effect
on history. Generally, this sort of scholarship cannot be done without
very detailed personal data; hence it is more likely that the best
subject is a recent historical figure. Psychobiography is perhaps
the most visible form of psychohistorical scholarship. It can be
especially open to misuse because scholars may find themselves unduly
tempted to brand their subject as more evil or pathological than
they might have actually been. A good example of this sort of problem
is Richard Nixon.
- Group
Psychohistory:
This is perhaps the most radical & anxiety provoking form
of psychohistorical scholarship. Here we study and seek to understand
the motivations of large groups in history. Like individuals, groups
are also driven by emotions and fantasies. There is no group mind,
separate from the individual members, rather groups are motivated
by members all having feelings and fantasies that are broadly the
same, in other words shared. It is a common truism that we will
do things in groups that we would never dream of doing as individuals,
this is one thing that can make the effort to understand group's
underlying emotion and fantasy so scary. But this work is also on
the forefront of psychohistorical scholarship. Thus it can be very
exciting.
If all this appeals to you, you might want to join us. We hope that
you will view the rest of our site and welcome your involvement and
support. There is a great deal left to do.
|