The psychological literature in Konrad
Lorenz’s work: a contribution to the history of ethology and
Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo
This paper aims at investigating
the presence of psychological literature in Konrad Lorenz’s work
as a preliminary instrument to investigate how Lorenz’s ideas
are related to Psychology. The bibliography of fourteen books
written by Konrad Lorenz (including three volumes containing 26
selected papers) have been analyzed. A total of 245 references
related to Psychology and related sciences have been selected.
These references were organized in five groups: a) The pioneers
of Ethology; b) Animal and Comparative Psychology; c) General
Psychology (Associationism, Structuralism, Functionalism,
Russian Reflexology and Classic Conditioning, Perceptual and
Gestalt Psychology, Psychoanalysis, Behaviorism, Social and
Developmental Psychology, Cognition, Emotion and Motivation); d)
Epistemology; e) Psychiatry and Neurosciences. These data show
that the History of Ethology and, particularly, Lorenz’s ideas,
show an extremely important relation with Psychology, justifying
the inclusion of Konrad Lorenz also in the History of
Konrad Lorenz; ethology; history of ethology.
Konrad Zacharias Lorenz (1903-1989), Nobel
Prize for Physiology or Medicine (1973), may be considered one of the most
important authors in the History of Ethology. Although the use of the term
Ethology replacing Comparative or Animal Psychology
has become usual, Lorenz preferred the expression Vergleichende
Verhaltensforschung to name his approach (Comparative Behavioural
Research). The use of Ethology as a synonym for Biology of
Behaviour has, in a certain way, given the impression that Ethology
had been separated from Psychology.
This paper aims at investigating the
presence of psychological literature in Konrad Lorenz’s work as a
preliminary instrument to investigate how Lorenz’s ideas are related to
Psychology. This literature is organized and classified and some points
are discussed regarding the inclusion of Konrad Lorenz as a relevant
author in the History of Psychology.
The bibliography of fourteen books written
by Konrad Lorenz (Lorenz, 1949, 1950, 1963, 1965, 1970, 1971, 1973a,
1973b, 1978a, 1978b, 1978c, 1983, 1988, 1992), including three volumes
containing 26 selected papers (Lorenz, 1970, 1971, 1978b), and covering
the period from 1931 to 1988, have been analyzed. A total of 245
references related to Psychology and related sciences have been selected.
The bibliography has been analyzed and the references relevant for
Psychology have been classified in five items: a) The Pioneers of Ethology;
b) Animal and Comparative Psychology; c) General Psychology; d)
Epistemology; and e) Psychiatry and Neurosciences. Each one of these five
areas are briefly discussed below. Complementary data on the History of
Psychology have been based on Garrett (1974), Heidbreder (1978),
Herrnstein & Boring (1971), Marx & Hillix (1978), Mueller (1968),
Penna (1978) and Schultz & Schultz (2002), especially concerning the
position of the cited authors in the History of Psychology, their
theoretical affiliation and biographical data, when available. The notes
at the end of the paper give the data available on the references found in
III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
1. THE PIONEERS OF ETHOLOGY
Lorenz considered that Ethology
had been created mainly by Whitman and Heinroth, although other
authors such as Craig and Huxley are also mentioned. Two works
published by Charles Ottis Whitman (1842-1910) are cited by Lorenz.
The paper Animal Behavior – 16th lecture from Biological
Lectures from the Marine Biological Laboratory of Woods Hole,
Massachusets (Whitman, 1898, cited by Lorenz, 1970, 1971, 1973b,
1978a, 1978b, 1992)(1)
is considered an important work in the foundation of Ethology
due to the fact that Whitman used behavioural data with systematic
aims. Whitman investigated the bahaviour of pigeons (Whitman,
1919, cited by Lorenz, 1963, 1978a, 1992)(2).
Wallace Craig (1876-1954), a disciple of Charles Whitman, also
interested in bird behaviour, has also influenced Lorenz. Lorenz
cites several works by Craig on the behaviour of doves. His work
Appetites and aversions as constitutens of instincts (1918,
cited by Lorenz, 1963, 1965, 1970, 1971, 1973b, 1978a, 1978b,
is mentioned in eight of the books reviewed. Among the cited works,
Craig wrote about animal learning (Craig, 1912, cited by Lorenz,
1970, 1992) (4),
the development and social behaviour of doves (Craig, 1908, cited
by Lorenz, 1970 and Craig, 1914, cited by Lorenz, 1970) (5)(6),
aggressive behaviour in animals (Craig, 1921, cited by Lorenz,
and the expression of emotions in animals (Craig, 1909, cited
by Lorenz, 1970, 1992, and Craig, 1921/1922, cited by Lorenz,
1970, 1992) (8)(9).
Craig published in journals of Biology, Ethics, Sociology, Animal
Behaviour, Comparative Neurology and Psycholgy, Abnormal and Social
Psychology. Craig’s discovery of appetitive behaviour is considered
one of the most important theoretical contributions in the advance
Oskar Heinroth (1871-1945) was
considered by Lorenz the founder of Ethology. Three works by Heinroth
are mentioned in the material analyzed: about behavioural patterns
in vertebrates (Heinroth, 1930, cited by Lorenz, 1973b, 1978a)(10),
about reflexive movements in birds (Heinroth, 1918, cited by Lorenz,
and, the one cited most frequently (in ten books) is a text presented
at the Fifth International Congress of Ornithology (Heinroth,
1910, cited by Lorenz, 1963, 1965, 1970, 1971, 1973a, 1973b, 1978a,
1978b, 1983, 1992)(12).
This is a remarkable paper about “Ethology and Psychology” of
Anatids. Julien Huxley, also considered to be an important influence
in the shaping of Ethology, related field studies and psychology
(Huxley and Howard, 1934, cited by Lorenz, 1970)(13).
What may be concluded from these authors
cited and considered as pioneers of Ethology is that although Whitman,
Craig and Heinroth were ornithologists, they were close to the area of
2. ANIMAL OR COMPARATIVE PSYCHOLOGY
The classic area of Animal Psychology has a
fundamental influence on Lorenz’s work. Several authors are mentioned
including English, German, Austrian, American and others.
2.1 Charles Darwin and other English
There is a strong influence of
evolutionary thinkers on Lorenz’s work, including Charles Darwin
(1809-1882). Although Lorenz adopted evolutionary approach, the
only book written by Darwin and mentioned in his work is The
Expression of Emotions in Man and Animals (1872, cited by
Lorenz, 1963, 1971, 1973b, 1978a, 1978b, 1983, 1992)(14),
which appears in the bibliography of seven books. It should be
noted, for instance, that in the Russian Manuscript (Lorenz,
1992), Darwin is mentioned only a few times while Kant, for instance,
is mentioned more than 80 times. Another classic of evolutionary
thinking mentioned is Herbert Spencer (1820-1903) (Principles
of Psychology, 1855-1872, cited by Lorenz, 1992)(15).
Another English animal psychologist who is present in Lorenz’s
work is Charles Lloyd Morgan (1852-1936) in a book relating instinct
and totality (Lloyd Morgan, 1909, cited by Lorenz, 1992)(16)
and another relating instinct and experience (Lloyd Morgan, 1913,
cited by Lorenz, 1970, 1992)(17).
William MacDougall (1871-1938) is the most important British proximate
influence on Lorenz’s work. The psychologist MacDougall worked
at Oxford for several years and then moved to the USA, where he
was a fierce opponent of Watson. Three of his books are mentioned:
An Outline of Psychology (1923, cited by Lorenz, 1970,
1971, 1978a, 1978b, 1983, 1992)(18),
An introduction to social psychology (1923, cited by Lorenz,
and The use and abuse of instinct in social psychology
(1921-1922, cited by Lorenz, 1970)(20).
Hinde’s book Animal Behavior, a Synthesis of Ethology and Comparative
Psychology (1972, cited by Lorenz, 1973b)(21)
may also be mentioned as an effort to relate Ethology and Comparative
Psychology, although Lorenz had some reserves about the synthesis.
Although the idea of evolution is a central
issue in Lorenz’s writings, the influence of Darwin should be regarded in
a general theoretical level, as the proponent of evolution. He has written
several articles to defend the idea of evolution, claiming that the
‘theory of evolution” should not be considered a ‘theory’ but a fact,
often defending the idea of evolution as an established scientific fact.
However, the original idea of behaviour patterns being subject to homology
(and so being useful to systematics) are not attributed to Darwin, but to
Whitman and Heinroth. Although Darwin has received an increasing attention
in the last decades from English and American psychologists, he may not be
considered the direct founder of Ethology, according to Lorenz. It is
interesting to note that in the 25th anniversary of the Nobel
Prize for Ethology, the organizers of the event (in Canada) chose the
image of Darwin and not of Lorenz, Tinbergen and Von Frisch to celebrate
Herbert Spencer, MacDougall and Lloyd
Morgan are criticized as ‘vitalistic philosophers’. This does not prevent
Lorenz from agreeing with these authors in some points. For instance, he
agrees with MacDougal that the healthy animal is up and doing. He also
declared that MacDougall made a number of entirely correct points. The
opposition between Lorenz and Hinde is known. The title of the copy of the
above mentioned book by Hinde, in Lorenz’s private library, was changed to
read “Animal Behaviour, a Castration of Ethology in Order to Save
Comparative Psychology”, what represents the feelings of Lorenz regarding
the work of Hinde.
Traditional Animal Psychology and the Concept of Instinct
Traditional papers on Animal Psychology
are present in Lorenz’s work. These include from old papers on
the “Psychology” of ants by Brun (1912, cited by Lorenz, 1973b)(22)
and the investigation of the biologische, tierpsychologische
und reflexbiologische aspects of the behaviour of ants by
Doflein (1916, cited by Lorenz, 1970)(23).
There is also an experimental psychological analysis of hens published
by Katz in the Journal für Psychologie (1909, cited by
and again about hunger and appetite, Katz (1931, cited by Lorenz,
some general books on Animal Behaviour: Russell (1934, cited by
Lorenz, 1970, 1992)(26),
and Buytendijk (1940, cited by Lorenz, 1971, 1978a, 1992)(27).
Three works by D. O. Hebb (1904-1985) are mentioned: The Organization
of Behaviour (1940, cited by Lorenz, 1978a, 1978b)(28),
Heredity and environment in mammalian behaviour (Hebb,
1953, cited by Lorenz, 1965, 1971, 1978a, 1978b)(29),
and A Textbook of Psychology (1958, cited by Lorenz, 1978a)(30).
Several traditional animal psychologists are mentioned concerning
their conceptions of instinct. Among these, Lorenz cites Herrick
(n.d., cited by Lorenz, 1970, 1992)(31)
and the image that he had proposed of the key and lock to give
an idea of innate releasing mechanism and the fixed action pattern.
The problem of animal instinct is also discussed by Bierens de
Haan, 1933 (cited by Lorenz, 1970) (32),
1935 (cited by Lorenz, 1970) (33)
and 1940 (cited by Lorenz, 1971, 1978a, 1978b, 1992) (34),
Ziegler (1920, cited by Lorenz, 1971)(35),
and Fletcher (1957, cited by Lorenz, 1970)(36).
William Thorpe discussed learning and instinctive behavior in
animals (1948, cited by Lorenz, 1971)(37),
the modern concept of instinctive behaviour (1956, cited by Lorenz,
1963, 1965, 1971)(38)
and science, man and morals (1965, cited by Lorenz, 1978b)(39).
Lorenz’s criticism on traditional Animal Psychology refers to
the problem of teleology and the lack of an evolutionary approach.
These authors, usually, are related somehow
to the problem of innate and learned aspects of behaviour. Lorenz used to
identify two trends in traditional Animal Psychology: Vitalism and
Mechanism. Although he may not be identified with any of these schools, he
accepted and adopted ideas present in both of them. Authors, such as
Bierens de Haan (and also Russell), have been considered vitalists (a kind
of supernatural interpretation of instinct). This author, for instance,
has been critized by Lorenz for having proposed that we meditate on
instinct, but we do not explain it. He also criticizes Buytendijk for
having questioned the dependence of the human psyche upon biological laws,
in particular those of heredity. Sometimes, he replies to criticism
directed against ethological ideas (the concept of innate), as the case of
Hebb. In other cases, he accepts some ideas of a cited author, as the case
of Thorpe’s ideas about habituation as a form of modification of behaviour.
In other cases, a particular point is mentioned as a support of his ideas,
as the case of Brun, who, according to Lorenz had demonstrated in ants
that each individual fixates its social response on the particular species
of ant which helped in hatch from the pupa or Katz, whose studies about
domestic chickens have demonstrated that a bird can individually recognize
a fair number of conspecifics.
Animal Sociology, Animal Social Psychology and Phenomenology
Sociology and Animal Social Psychology are expressions used by
some authors cited by Lorenz. Lorenz mentions the works
of Schjelderup-Ebbe on the social psychology of the domestic hen
(1922/1923, cited by Lorenz, 1970, 1992)(40)
and the social psychology of birds (1924, cited by Lorenz, 1970)(41).
Both these papers were published in the Zeitschrifit für Psychologie.
The expression Animal Sociology was used by Alverdes (1925,
cited by Lorenz, 1970, 1992)(42)
and Brückner (1933, cited by Lorenz, 1970)(43),
in a paper also published in the Zeitschrift für Psychologie.
von Uexküll, considered by Lorenz as one of his “masters”, was
a representative of Phenomenology. He cites three works written
by von Uexküll on animal and human behaviour: Umwelt und Innenleben
der Tiere (Uexküll, 1909, cited by Lorenz, 1970, 1971, 1973b,
1978a, 1978b, 1983, 1992)(44),
cited in seven books; Theoretische Biologie (Uexküll, 1920,
cited by Lorenz, 1970, 1992)(45);
and Streifzüge durch die Umwelten von Tieren und Menschen (Uexküll,
1934, cited by Lorenz, 1970)(46).
The idea of Animal Sociology or Animal
Social Psychology in these authors (including Lorenz) is influenced by the
classic considerations of whole and part in the behaviour,
classic ideas of Gestalt Psychology. In this way, Lorenz, as a
researcher of animal social behaviour using these ideas, should be
included also in the history of Social Psychology, sharing some points of
view with Kurt Lewin. The presence of authors related to Phenomenology
among the influences Lorenz received is an indication that Lorenz’s
intention has never been to deny subjective experience or subjective
2.4 Ethology and Psychology of Animals in
Zoos and Circuses
mentions several authors working with animals in zoos and circuses
and who used the expression Animal Psychology in their
works. The most famous is, problably, Heini Hediger (1908-1992)
and his works on the Psychology of animals in zoos and circuses.
Hediger wrote about the Biology and Psychology of scape in animals
(1934, cited by Lorenz, 1963, 1970, 1978a, 1983)(47),
about Biology and Psychology of animals in captivity (1935, cited
by Lorenz, 1970)(48)
and about wild animals in captiviy (1942, cited by Lorenz, 1983)(49).
His most famous work is “Studies of the Psychology and Behaviour
of Captive Animals in Zoos and Circuses” (Hediger, 1954, cited
by Lorenz, 1978a, 1983 and Hediger, 1955, cited by Lorenz, 1963)
Portielje wrote about Ethology and Psychology of Botaurus stellaris
and Phalacrocorax carbo subcormoranus (Portielje 1926,
cited by Lorenz, 1970; Portielje, 1927, cited by Lorenz, 1970;
and Portielje, 1928, cited by Lorenz, 1978a, 1983, 1992) (52)
It should not be forgotten that Heinroth, who Lorenz considered
the real “father’’ of Ethology, investigated captive animals in
the Berlin Zoo. Zeeb (1964, cited by Lorenz, 1973b, 1978a)(55)
also wrote about circus and Animal Psychology. Another author
who discussed “ethological and psychological” aspects of birds
is Makkink (1960, cited by Lorenz, 1970, 1978a, 1978b)(56).
It is interesting to note the use of both terms Biology (or Ethology)
and Psychology. Heinroth, and even Lorenz, sometimes, used both
terms as complementary in the study of their animals.
Lorenz has always given credit to people
who knew animals from experience, people who had to live with animals
every day, to work with them and, so, familiar with them. This was the
case of these authors, several of them working as zoo directors. This is
the kind of experience that he cannot find in some American psychologists
who investigate animal behaviour in laboratory conditions.
The Behaviour of Lower and Higher Organisms
The behaviour or primates is of
special interest to Lorenz. Several references are made to comparative
psychologists working on primate behaviour, usually American psychologists
investigating the behaviour of the chimpanzee and other primates.
The authors mentioned include Klüver (1933, cited by Lorenz, 1971,
on behaviour mechanisms in monkeys, R. M. Yerkes and his book
on “Chimpanzees: A Laboratory Colony” (1943, cited by Lorenz,
Several works by H.F. Harlow have been mentioned: Harlow, 1954
(cited by Lorenz, 1971)(59),
Harlow, 1960a (cited by Lorenz, 1973b) (60),
Harlow, 1960b (cited by Lorenz, 1973b, 1978a, 1983) (61),
Harlow,1950 (cited by Lorenz, 1965, 1971, 1973b, 1978a, 1983)
Harlow, 1962a (cited by Lorenz, 1978a, 1983) (63),
Harlow, 1962b (cited by Lorenz, 1978a, 1983) (64).
Harlow’s themes are: learning and object discrimination, maternal
and infantile affectional patterns, the effect of rearing conditions
on behaviour and social deprivation in monkeys. Lorenz also mentions
three works of Gardner and Gardner, published in 1967 (cited by
Lorenz, 1978a) (65),
1969 (cited by Lorenz, 1978a) (66)
and 1971 (cited by Lorenz, 1978a) (67)
about language and communication in the chimpanzee. Finally, Lorenz
mentions two works by D. Premack (1971, cited by Lorenz, 1978a
and Premack, 1976, cited by Lorenz, 1978a) (68)(69)
who discussed intelligence and language in man and ape. Hayes
(1951, cited by Lorenz, 1978a)(70)
investigated the behaviour of apes in home environment and Carpenter
(1934, cited by Lorenz, 1963)(71)
investigated the behaviour and social relations of howling monkeys.
As an ornithologist, the interest of Lorenz in these papers on
primate behaviour indicates that these references are relevant
for his discussions of the evolution of human psychological aspects,
in his Evolutionary Epistemology.
On the other side, Lorenz also
mentions some classic authors working on the behaviour of lower
organisms. This is also an indication that he is interested in
the wide possibilities of animal behaviour. These traditional
studies are also related to physiological investigation and are,
in this way, a bridge between biological and psychological issues.
Lorenz mentions three classic authors: a) the American psychologist
H.S. Jennings (1868-1947). His book Behaviour of the lower
organisms (1906, cited by Lorenz, 1970, 1971, 1973b, 1978a,
was mentioned in five books; b) The German psychologist Jacques
Loeb (1859-1924) was important by the work Die Tropismen,
published in a handbook of comparative physiology (1913, cited
by Lorenz, 1973b, 1992)(73);
c) The book Die Orientierung der Tiere im Raum, written
by Alfred Kühn (1919, cited by Lorenz, 1965, 1971, 1973b, 1978a,
1978b, 1983, 1992)(74)
received seven mentions and discusses the orientation of animals
Jennings, for instance, is praised and
considered to be the first one to observe and describe animal behaviour as
a worthy task, however, he never conducted phylogenetic comparisons
between the behaviour patterns of related animal species. Some ideas that
became very important in Lorenz’s work, such as the ideas of orienting
responses and taxes, are taken from Alfred Kühn. The idea of tropism is
used by Lorenz although he criticizes the attempts of Loeb to explain all
animal and human behaviour in terms of the principle of tropism.
3. GENERAL PSYCHOLOGY
It is possible to find several classic
authors related to traditional systems in Psychology in Konrad Lorenz’s
work, such as Associationism (including Russian Reflexology), Perception
and Gestalt Psychology, Psychoanalysis, Behaviourism, Social and
Developmental Psychology and papers on cognition, emotion and motivation,
classic themes in Psychology.
3.1 “Classic Psychology”: Associationism,
Structuralism and Functionalism
It is possible to find references
to representatives of Associationism (Edward L. Thorndike, 1874-1949),
Structuralism (Wilhelm Wundt, 1832-1920) and Functionalism (John
Dewey, 1859-1952) in Lorenz’s work. Wundt’s book Vorlesungen
über die Menschen- und Tierseele (1922, cited by Lorenz, 1978a,
was cited in three books. Thorndike’s Animal Intelligence
(1911, cited by Lorenz, 1965, 1973b, 1978a)(76)
is also cited. The references seem to be mainly related to Animal
Psychology. Thorndike and Wundt are considered representatives
of the mechanistic way of thinking. Lorenz agrees with the pragmatist
John Dewey in that the idea that a factor introduced for the purpose
of explanation is nothing other than the articulation of the already
known fact with a new word, an epistemological point.
Reflexology and Classic Conditioning
Lorenz is quite positive in relation
to Ivan P. Pavlov (1849-1936) and classic conditioning. He mentions
two books written by Pavlov: a treatise on the higher nervous
activities of animals (1926, cited by Lorenz, 1992)(77)
and a classic work on conditioned reflexes (1927, cited by Lorenz,
1965, 1971, 1978a, 1978b, 1992)(78).
As previously observed, the liaision of Lorenz with some psychological
authors seems to be in function of Animal Psychology. Lorenz also
mentions a work by W. Bechterev (1857-1927) on human reflexology
(1926, cited by Lorenz, 1970)(79).
Another Russian reflexologist mentioned is P.K. Anokhin, also
in a text on conditioned reflex, discussing a new physiological
interpretation (1961, cited by Lorenz, 1978a)(80).
Other authors that are mentioned working on conditioned reflexes
are H.S. Lidell (1934, 1944) and Hogan and Adler (1963, cited
by Lorenz, 1978a)(81).
Two of these texts are directly related to comparative psychology
of animal behaviour. Lidell (1934, cited by Lorenz, 1978a)(82)
writes about conditioned reflexes in a book on Comparative Psychology.
Lidell (1944, cited by Lorenz, 1978a)(83)
relates conditioned reflex method and experimental neurosis in
a book about personality and behaviour disorders. Hogan &
Adler (1963) relate classical conditioning and punishment and
instinctive response in the fish Betta splendens.
An intriguing aspect of Lorenz’s writings
is his fierce opposition to Behaviourism (dealing with operant
conditioning) and his positive reaction to Pavlov’s work on classic
conditioning. Two points could be discussed: 1) The first is that Lorenz
has always been interested in processes of learning (which he prefers to
denominate modification of behaviour). His opposition to Watson and
Skinner is not because he denies the importance of learning processes in
animals and man but for their election of one kind of learning process as
the only one to be considered; 2) The second point is that, while Watson
and Skinner are not interested in physiological processes, Pavlov was, in
reality, a physiologist. Lorenz considers that the discovery of
conditioned reflex was an extremely useful tool for the analytical
investigatoin of animal and human behaviour. Lorenz also considered that
Pavlov never denied the psychological side of the phenomena he studied
from a physiological point of view, what he considered a positive aspect.
and Gestalt Psychology
These are, probably, the areas/systems
of Psychology that were more influential on Lorenz’s thinking.
Traditional authors investigating perception such as Ehrenfels
and Helmholtz are very important in Lorenz’s work. Perception
was an essential aspect in the development of Evolutionary Epistemology.
Helmholz, assistant of Gustav Fechner (1801-1887), worked on visual
and auditory perception uniting Physics, Physiology and Psychology.
Several works by Hermann von Helmholtz (1821-1894) are cited by
Lorenz (especially in Lorenz, 1992 and 1978). The first one to
be mentioned is the Handbook of Physiological Optics (1856-1867,
cited by Lorenz, 1978a, 1992)(84).
Writings about perception, Physics, Epistemology (Erkenntnistheorie)
are also mentioned: Helmholtz, 1877 (cited by Lorenz, 1978a) (85),
Helmholtz, 1878 (cited by Lorenz, 1978a)(86),
Helmholtz, 1882-1895 (cited by Lorenz, 1978a)(87),
Helmholtz, 1887 (cited by Lorenz, 1978a)(88),
Helmholtz, 1897-1898 (cited by Lorenz, 1978a) (89)
and Helmholtz, 1921 (cited by Lorenz, 1978a) (90).
Lorenz presents several points in common with Helmholtz, as the
interest in Epistemology, in perception and in Physics/Physiology.
Christian von Ehrenfels (1859-1932), considered one of the pioneers
of Gestalt Psychology and known by the proposition of Gestatqualitäten
or form qualities is cited in the Russian Manuscript (Ehrenfels,
1904, cited by Lorenz, 1978a, 1992)(91).
The idea of totality (ganzheit) and of parts is an important
basis for the development of Lorenz’s systemic ideas. Wolfgang
Köhler (1887-1949) is another case in which Animal Psychology
is discussed from the point of view of an important school of
Psychology. Lorenz cites the experiments of insight in
apes and this will be taken into account in his Evolutionary Epistemology.
The references to Köhler are always due to his research on the
mentality of apes (Köhler, 1915, cited by Lorenz, 1970, 1992 and
Köhler, 1921, cited by Lorenz, 1978a, 1978b, 1983 and Köhler,
1973, cited by Lorenz, 1973b)
The Austrian Gestalt Psychologists were very influential on Lorenz’s
thinking. In this sense, he mentions Charlotte Bühler’s work on
developmental psychology (1922, cited by Lorenz, 1971)(95)
and about the problem of instinct (1927, cited by Lorenz, 1970)(96).
The most important psychological influence on Lorenz was certainly
the work of Karl Bühler. This author has exerted a direct influence
on Lorenz as his teacher. Bühler was an important “bridge” to
psychological thinking in Lorenz’s career. Lorenz was guided in
the field of psychological literature by Bühler, and this author
used to invite researchers from other countries to go to Austria.
Bühler’s experiments of “aha” effects are cited in Lorenz’s books.
He cites three works by Bühler: Handbuch der Psychologie, I.
Teil: Die Struktur der Wahrnemungen (Bühler, 1922, cited by
Lorenz, 1971, 1973b, 1978a, 1983, 1992)(97),
Die geistige Entwicklung des Kindes (Bühler, 1922, cited
by Lorenz, 1965, 1971)(98)
and, Zukunft der Psychologie (Bühler, 1936, cited by Lorenz,
authors related to the Gestalt movement are mentioned: Metzger
(1936, cited by Lorenz, 1992 and Metzger, 1953, cited by Lorenz,
1973b, 1978a, 1983) (100)(101)
working on perception and general psychology, Sander (1928, cited
by Lorenz, 1971)(102)
and Matthaei (1929, cited by Lorenz, 1971, 1978a, 1992)(103).
Important issues in Gestalt Psychology (as the concept of totality)
were also the object of biological thinkers close to Lorenz, what
can be found in the works by Alverdes (Die Ganzheitsbetrachtung
in der Biologie, 1932, cited by Lorenz, 1970)(104)
and Otto Koehler (Die Ganzheitsbetrachtung in der modernen
Biologie, 1933, cited by Lorenz, 1992)(105).
The contact between Lorenz and
psychological thinking was first mediated by Karl Bühler, a Gestalt
Psychologist. Some similarities between Lorenz ideas and the attitudes of
Gestalt psychologists are amazing, as the opposition in relation to
Behaviourism, the influence of Physics (Lorenz’s correspondence with Max
Planck), the research in the same areas (as animal intelligence), the
ideas os system, the proximity with Physiology and the importance of
perception, for instance. The Evolutionary Epistemology proposed by Lorenz
is, in a large measure, a development of Gestalt Psychology.
Konrad Lorenz and Sigmund Freud
(1856-1939) share several similar ideas about motivation, the
problems civilization brought to human life and so on. Four references
to Sigmund Freud (1856 – 1939) may be found in the books reviewed:
Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality (1905, cited by
Introductory Lectures on Psycho-Analysis (1917, cited by
Vorlesungen zur Einführung in die Psychoanalyse (1930,
cited by Lorenz, 1971, 1992)(108)
and Gesammelte Werke (1950, cited by Lorenz, 1978a)(109).
Concerning the first authors working on Psychoanalysis, there
is a reference to Jung in a work by Feuerborn (1939, cited by
relating the concept of instinct and the concept of archetype.
Alverdes also discussed the idea or archetype in animal psychology
in the Die Wirksamkeit von Archetypen in den Intinskthandlungen
der Tiere (1937, cited by Lorenz, 1971)(111).
Another ancient reference to a work published in the Psychoanalitycal
Review is Friedmann’s The instinctive emotional life of
birds (1934, cited by Lorenz, 1970)(112).
René Spitz (1887-1974), an Austrian psychoanalist, was a friend
of Lorenz and influenced Lorenz’s ideas, especially those concerning
the risks of hospitalism. Two books written by Spitz have
been mentioned: Hospitalism (1945, cited by Lorenz, 1970)(113)
and La première année de la vie de l’enfant (1958, cited
by Lorenz, 1963, 1970, 1973a, 1978a, 1978b, 1983)(114).
John Bowlby (1907-1990), whose work has been influenced by Ethology,
had two references cited: Maternal care and mental health
(1952, cited by Lorenz, 1970, 1978b)(115)
and The nature of the child’s tie to his mother (1958,
cited by Lorenz, 1970, 1978b)(116).
Lorenz, in his last books, also cites Erik Erikson (especially
his idea of pseudo-speciation). The works by Erikson cited by
Lorenz are Wachstum und Krisen der gesunden Persönlichkeit
(1953, cited by Lorenz, 1978b)(117);
Insight and Responsibility (1964, cited by Lorenz, 1973a)(118)
and Ontogeny of Ritualization in Man (1966, cited by Lorenz,
1973a, 1973b, 1978b, 1983)(119).
Lorenz also cites Erich Fromm’s Anatomie der menschlichen Destruktivitat
(1974, cited by Lorenz, 1978b, 1983)(120).
There is a trend in Lorenz’s work to discuss human social life
as a physician and to discuss human behaviour and its crisis in
human civilization. In this sense, he tends to be closer to some
authors in Psychoanalysis. Mitscherlich’s Die vaterlose Gesellschaft
(1963, cited by Lorenz, 1973a)(121)
should also be inserted here.
There is no doubt that the theoretical
system developed by Lorenz shows several points in common with
Psychoanalysis. As we have discussed in relation to Behaviourism, the
relationship of Lorenz and Psychoanalysis, however, presents positive and
negative aspects, agreement and disagreement. Some times he criticizes
some points of Psychoanalysis (as the opposition of Eros and Thanatos), in
other moments he adopts and uses psychoanalytic concepts (as the concept
of sublimation). Some personal contacts have influenced Lorenz in this
use. Lorenz’s meeting with Erik Erikson in a work group organized by the
World Health Organization may have been sufficient for Lorenz’s adoption
of his concept of ‘pseudo-speciation’, which he applied several times. The
classic concept of sublimation is adopted and used side by side with the
concept of behaviour displacement. The ideas of motivational energy, of
accumulation of energy, and of catharsis (close to the idea of consumation)
are very similar to some of Lorenz’s ideas. Concerning human life and
civilization, some ideas of Lorenz remind those of Freud as our difficulty
to live in the modern conditions of civilization and the demands of
culture upon our psychic apparatus.
behaviourists Watson, Skinner (1904-1990), Tolman and Garcia are
mentioned. Lorenz is a hard opponent of the Behaviourism of Watson
and Skinner, but he is more positive concerning the ideas of Tolman
and Garcia. John Watson (1878-1958)’s
Psychology as the behaviorist views it (1913, cited by
Lorenz, 1971, 1978b)(122)
and Der Behaviorismus (1930, cited by Lorenz, 1983)(123)
are cited. He also cites four references by Skinner: Conditioning
and extinction and their relation to drive (1936, cited by
Lorenz, 1973b, 1978a)(124),
The Behavior of Organisms (1938, cited by Lorenz, 1973b,
Reinforcement Today (1958, cited by Lorenz, 1973b, 1978a,
and Beyond Freedom and Dignity (1971, cited by Lorenz,
1973b, 1978a, 1983)(127).
Lorenz has always been an opponent of Behaviourism, considering
that the behaviouristic selection of conditioning by reinforcement
as a general principle of behaviour as an error. Lorenz never
denied the importance of learning and his theory on the possibilities
of different kinds of learning occupies an important place in
his work. What is remarkable is that the main opponents of his
ideas (behaviourists) are in the psychological field. In his opposition
to Behaviourism, Lorenz is again aligned with Gestalt psychologists
and even with MacDougall. He also mentions Clark L. Hull (1884-1952)
and his “Principles of Behavior” (1943, cited by
Lorenz, 1965, 1970, 1971, 1973b, 1978a)(128).
Although Lorenz is very critic
about Watson and Skinner contributions, he is influenced by Tolman
and he cites Garcia several times as a positive contribution.
Tolman’s Purposive Behaviour in Animals and Men (1932,
cited by Lorenz, 1965, 1970, 1971, 1973b, 1978a, 1992)(129)
is frequently cited (in six books). Tolman’s purposive behaviour
and Lorenz’s appetitive behaviour are similar concepts.
In both, we may see the emphasis on cognitive mechanisms that
have been recognized as a very important theme in contemporary
John Garcia (1917- ) is another
behaviourist that is cited by Lorenz as a support for the idea
that learning shows important limitations. He cites Garcia &
Koelling (1967, cited by Lorenz, 1973b, 1978a)(130);
Garcia & Ervin (1967, cited by Lorenz, 1978a)(131);
Garcia, McGowan, Ervin & Koelling (1968, cited by Lorenz,
and Garcia, Hankins & Rusiniak (1974, cited by Lorenz, 1978a)(133).
Although Lorenz criticizes the position
adopted by Watson, for instance, denying the existence of complex
coordinated sequences of innate motor acitivities, he also recognizes the
considerable value of behaviourist research, for instance, taking
objective behaviour as the focus of observation. The same may be said
about Tolman. Lorenz considered animal behaviour as purposive and
considered that Tolman had given a very good objective definition of
purposive behaviour as the fact that the same constant end or goal is
achieved in the animal by variable adaptive behaviour.
Several authors related to social and
developmental psychology are mentioned in Lorenz’s writings. Concerning
these areas, the idea of imprinting seems to be an important point
Social psychologists are not usual
in Lorenz’s writings. Traditional authors are restricted to Bavelas
(1957, cited by Lorenz, 1971)(134),
in a paper about group size, and the classic Milgram’s Behavioral
Study of Obedience (1963, cited by Lorenz, 1978b)(135).
Although Gehlen is an anthropologist, we could mention his paper
on human life in industrial society and social-psychological problems
arising from it (Gehlen, 1960, cited by Lorenz, 1978b)(136).
References to Kurt Lewin (1890-1947) and to incest taboo are also
mentioned (Bischof, n.d., cited by Lorenz,1973b and Bischof, 1972,
cited by Lorenz, 1973b) (137)(138).
The problem of development is a
common point of interest in Psychology and Ethology. Several works
related to Developmental Psychology are cited by Lorenz in the
material investigated. The area may be subdivided as follows:
a) The investigation of the relations between development and
animal psychology, including Volkelt (1914, cited by Lorenz, 1970,
and Schneirla (1966, cited by Lorenz, 1978b)(140).
Volkelt (1937, cited by Lorenz, 1970, 1978b, 1992)(141)
discussed Animal Psychology as genetic totality psychology; b)
The discussion of imprinting, early social experience and development:
Carmichael (1926, cited by Lorenz, 1970, 1992)(142),
Birch (1945, cited by Lorenz, 1971)(143),
Riess (1954, cited by Lorenz, 1965, 1971, 1978b)(144),
Hess (1959, cited by Lorenz, 1970, 1978b)(145),
Hess (1973, cited by Lorenz, 1978a)(146),
Schutz (1964, cited by Lorenz, 1965)(147),
Gottlieb (1965, cited by Lorenz, 1978b)(148)
and Kruijt (1971, cited by Lorenz, 1978a)(149);
c) Neonate behaviour including early social behaviour: Freedman,
1964 (cited by Lorenz, 1978b) (150)
and Freedman, 1965 (cited by Lorenz, 1978b) (151),
Peiper, 1935 (cited by Lorenz, 1971) (152)
and Peiper, 1961 (cited by Lorenz, 1978b) (153),
Prechtl & Knol (1958, cited by Lorenz, 1965, 1971)(154);
d) Play and object manipulation: Groos (1907, cited by Lorenz,
Bally (1945, cited by Lorenz, 1971, 1973b, 1978a, 1978b, 1983)(156),
Bower (1971, cited by Lorenz, 1973b, 1978b) (157),
Eigen & Winkler (1975, cited by Lorenz, 1978a, 1983)(158);
e) Developmental Psychology general issues: Werner (1933, cited
by Lorenz, 1970) (159),
Schroeder (1931, cited by Lorenz, 1971) (160)
and Ahrens (1953, cited by Lorenz, 1978b)(161).
Although Lorenz has always investigated
social behaviour, his discussions with authors from Social Psychology are
limited. The importance of the phenomenon of imprinting for Developmental
Psychology probably explains a more proximate relation with some
literature in the area, although one could consider it quite limited as
Emotion and Motivation
These three concepts are very important in
the History of Psychology and are also present in Konrad Lorenz’s work in
a remarkable form. Lorenz mentions authors discussing cognition (learning,
reasoning, perception, thinking, orientation, language), emotion and
motivation. Lorenz emphasized cognition what makes sense with his interest
in Evolutionary Epistemology.
Cognition and language are traditional
areas of Psychology and Lorenz cites works about different cognitive
processes: a) Orientation: optical orientation in ants (Jander,
1957, cited by Lorenz, 1965)(162);
orientation in birds – Hoffman (1954, cited by Lorenz, 1965) (163)
and Sauer (1961, cited by Lorenz, 1970) (164);
the sun in the orientation of animals (Hoffmann, 1952, cited by
orientation of animals - Engelmann (1928, cited by Lorenz, 1928)(166)
and Fraenkel & Gunn (1961, cited by Lorenz, 1978b)(167);
b) Space perception: in the chick – Hess (1956, cited by Lorenz,
1965, 1971, 1973b, 1978a)(168)
and Bateson (1964, cited by Lorenz, 1970)(169),
and in children (Ball & Tronick, 1971, cited by Lorenz, 1973b,
c) Size, colour and form perception: in birds (Bingham, 1913,
cited by Lorenz, 1970)(171),
in bees (von Frisch, 1914, cited by Lorenz, 1965)(172)
and Hertz (1937, cited by Lorenz, 1965) (173),
and in children (Bower, 1966, cited by Lorenz, 1978b)(174);
d) Sound perception: music (Kneutgen, 1970, cited by Lorenz, 1978b,
e) Kinesis (Birdwhistell, 1963, cited by Lorenz, 1978b and 1970,
cited by Lorenz, 1978b)(176)(177);
f) Social perception: the kindchenschema (Hückstedt, 1965,
cited by Lorenz, 1978b)(178);
sensory cues involved in maternal retrieving in rats (Beach &
Jaynes, 1956, cited by Lorenz, 1965)(179);
g) Reasoning: in white rats (Maier, 1929, cited by Lorenz, 1973b)(180),
in humans, on direction (Maier, 1930, cited by Lorenz, 1973b)(181);
h) Language: evolution of language and reason (Hopp, 1970,
cited by Lorenz, 1973b)(182),
non-verbal communication – Frijda, 1964 (cited by Lorenz, 1978b)(183)
and Birdwhistell, 1968 (cited by Lorenz, 1978b)(184),
language of bees (von Frisch, 1923, cited by Lorenz, 1992)(185),
an experimental test of an alleged innate sign stimulus
(Hirsch; Lindley & Tolman, 1955, cited by Lorenz, 1971)(186);
i) Learning: discrimination learning by rhesus monkeys to visual
exploration (Butler, 1953, cited by Lorenz, 1953)(187),
experience and problems of Learning Psychology (Foppa, 1966, cited
by Lorenz, 1973b, 1978a)(188).
And also general works such as the discussion of epistemological
basic problems of Perception Psychology (Bischof, 1966, cited
by Lorenz, 1978b)(189)
and conceptual thinking and hominisation (Decker, n.d., cited
by Lorenz, 1973b)(190).
Concerning emotions, a paper by
Labarre (1947, cited by Lorenz, 1978b)(191)
about the cultural basis of emotions and gestures is cited. Motivation
is a common concept in both areas: classic Ethology and Psychology
(and also Behavioral Physiology). Lorenz mentions the physiological
aspects of motivation – Stellar (1954, cited by Lorenz, 1978a)
Roberts & Kiess (1964, cited by Lorenz, 1978b)(193)
and motivation in Ethology (Leyhausen, 1965, cited by Lorenz,
In sum, cognition, emotion and motivation
are parts of Lorenz’s system. His work not only takes into account these
traditional psychological concepts but he also tries to relate them.
Cognition is the most evident trend in his system. Learning, reasoning,
perception, thinking, orientation, language are present in his writings.
These processes receive an evolutionary interpretation and also a
physiological explanation. What could be observed here is that it is not
difficult to relate Lorenz ideas with psychological literature in these
fields. Obviously, Lorenz has emphasized evolutionary processes and he has
never worked directly on human beings. What is remarkable is that his
advances in the studies of cognition, emotion and motivation have not been
continued in an empirical area of research. His disciples or students have
focused on other points. Eibl-Eibesfeldt, for instance, devoted his career
to find and investigate universals in human behaviour in a descriptive
way, being closer to the ancient ideas of Lorenz that instinctive
behaviour patterns should be shared by all the members of a species.
Others worked on Cultural Ethology (e.g. Otto Koenig). It is remarkable
that Ethology could possibly have influenced the development of an
‘Ethological Psychology’ as a continuation and expansion of Lorenz’s
ideas. However, Human Ethology has taken another direction and these ideas
resulted in the building of an Evolutionary Epistemology, and not a formal
school of Psychology. The reason why this ocurred is an open question. One
could speculate that Lorenz’s ideas have been poorly understood and that
Ethology has been received as a form of observation of external behaviour
(and even a kind of Behaviourism in its ‘objectivity’). But this does not
represent the intelectual project of Lorenz. Lorenz was fully interested
in human cognition (the evolution and functioning of human cognitive
apparatus), emotion (even as the basis of our ethical, esthetic and moral
judgements) and motivation. Human Ethology developed in Austria as a
search for universals in human behaviour (close to Anthropology) or as a
method of observation of human behaviour (not directly dealing with
language and cognitive, emotional processes). Psychology has recently
advanced towards evolutionary ideas stemming mainly from Sociobiology.
Although Epistemology is, traditionally, a
division of Philosophy, recent authors working on Epistemology have
exerted a crucial influence on Psychology and vice-versa. There are three
major areas in which the epistemological literature may be found in
Lorenz’s writings: a) Physics and Knowledge; b) Philosophy and Konwledge;
and, c) Cognition and Epistemology. Epistemology and Cognitive Psychology
are intimately related and Lorenz considered that his contribution to
Epistemology (particularly Evolutionary Epistemology) was even more
important than his contribution to Ethology. As Epistemology and
Psychology are related fields, we list and comment below the references in
Lorenz’s work about this area of knowledge.
4.1 Physics and Knowledge
There is no doubt that Lorenz had
a particular admiration for Physics. He was proud of his contact
with Max Planck, one of the most important physicists of the XXth
century and known for his contribution to Quantic Physics. The
point of contact between Lorenz and the scientists of the physical
world are the limits and possibilities of knowledge as the result
that we, human beings, are also formed by physical elements and
that our knowledge of the world is limited by our capacities.
Lorenz cites Bohr (1958, cited by Lorenz, 1971)(195)
commenting on atoms and human knowledge (and remarks made by Bridgman,
1958, cited by Lorenz, 1971)(196).
But, the most important influence from a physicist on Lorenz was
from Max Planck (1942, cited by Lorenz, 1971, 1973b, 1992)(197).
Lorenz was proud of having changed letters with Planck and that
both agreed in the need of Epistemology as an important tool for
the advancement of science, when we have also to analyse our perceptual
apparatus together with the world that we are investigating. This
attraction between Physics and Epistemology and Psychology is
a tradition in German Psychology, as we can see in the work by
Helmholtz or in the attraction that Physics has exerted on Gestalt
4.2 Phylosophy and Knowledge
Lorenz’s interest in Epistemology certainly was influenced by
the position he occupied as professor of Psychology in Königsberg.
He was the last one to occupy the chair of Immanuel Kant, together
with Eduard Baumgarten. Baumgarten had studied with John Dewey
in the USA and Lorenz mentions several works by Baumgarten, a
philosopher of Pragmatic orientation, closely related to Dewey,
an important American philosopher and psychologist – Baumgarten,
1933 (cited by Lorenz, 1978b) (198),
Baumgarten, 1938 (cited by Lorenz, 1978b, 1992) (199),
Baumgarten, 1941 (cited by Lorenz, 1978b) (200),
Baumgarten, 1950 (cited by Lorenz, 1971, 1978b) (201).
He also cites John Dewey’s Experience and Nature (1925,
cited by Lorenz, 1978a, 1992)(202)
and Reconstruction in Philosophy (1936, cited by Lorenz,
John Dewey is a very important bridge between Philosophy and Psychology
in the USA, and the familiarity of Lorenz with his work is an
interesting point of contact between both areas.
4.3 Cognition and Epistemology
distinguished psychologists investigating the problem of knowledge
are present in Lorenz’s writings: Egon Brunswick and Donald T.
Campbell. Lorenz cites Brunswik’s Wahrnemung und Gegenstandwelt,
Psychologie vom Gegenstand her (1934, cited by Lorenz, 1970,
The Conceptual Framework of Psychology (1952, cited by
and Scope and aspects of the cognitive problem (1957, cited
by Lorenz, 1965, 1971, 1973b, 1978a, 1983)(206).
Lorenz and Brunswick present similar ideas concerning the importance
of constance phenomena in perception and knowledge. Campbell,
former president of the American Psychological Association, was
also directly related to Lorenz, especially concening Evolutionary
Epistemology. Campbell’s Methodological suggestions for a comparative
psychology of knowledge processes (1958, cited by Lorenz,
Pattern matching as an essential in distal knowing (1966a,
cited by Lorenz, 1971, 1973a, 1973b, 1983)(208)
and Evolutionary Epistemology (1966b, cited by Lorenz,
1971, 1973b, 1983)(209)
have been mentioned by Lorenz. Lorenz considered that Campbell
(and also Popper, Riedl and himself) had, independently from each
other, developed similar ideas about Evolutionary Epistemology.
Anyway, Campbell and Brunswick, are important psychologists working
on cognition in the borders of Psychology and Epistemology.
It is interesting to note that cognition is
one of the most important areas of research in nowadays Psychology and
that Lorenz was interested in the evolution and functioning of cognitive
processes. His epistemological ideas, related to cognition, are also
largely influenced by Gestalt Psychology: the ideas of perception and
knowledge, of insight, the central role of the central representation of
space, for instance, and also include learning possibilities in the
evolution of knowledge.
5. PSYCHIATRY AND NEUROSCIENCES
Both these areas are closely related to
Psychology and the History of Psychiatry and Neurophysiology is also
closely connected with the History of Psychology. Several psychiatrists
and neurophysiologists are mentioned.
Authors related to Physiology and
Neurophysiology are frequently cited in Lorenz’s work. Classics
of Physiology are mentioned, as Sir C. Bell’s The Nervous System
of the Human Body (1830, cited by Lorenz, 1992)(210),
Claude Bernard’s Physiologie générale (1872, cited by Lorenz,
and Johannes Müller’s Handbuch der Physiologie des Menschen
(1833-1840, cited by Lorenz, 1992)(212).
Two books of the English psychologist C.S. Sherrington (1857-1952)
about the integrative action of the nervous system (1906, cited
by Lorenz, 1973b, 1978a)(213)
and about low level coordination (1931, cited by Lorenz, 1978a,
are mentioned, relating Physiology and Psychology. But Lorenz
cites especially authors analysing the brain and the central nervous
system: Weiss, 1941 (cited by Lorenz, 1971)(215),
Hess & Brügger, 1943 (cited by Lorenz, 1971)(216),
Grey Walter, 1953 (cited by Lorenz, 1971, 1978a)(217),
Hess, 1954 (cited by Lorenz, 1978b)(218),
Hess, 1957 (cited by Lorenz, 1978a) (219),
Mark & Ervin, 1970 (cited by Lorenz, 1978b)(220)
or investigating the influence of hormones and chemicals – Beach,
1942 (cited by Lorenz, 1965, 1971, 1978a)(221)
and Beach, 1948 (cited by Lorenz, 1973b) (222),
Richter, 1954 (cited by Lorenz, 1965)(223),
Hassler & Bak, 1966 (cited by Lorenz, 1978b)(224).
Lorenz cites three works written by the important neurophysiologist
John Eccles about the neurophysiological basis of mind (Eccles,
1953, cited by Lorenz, 1973b, 1978a)(225),
brain and conscious experience (Eccles, 1966, cited by Lorenz,
and about the uniqueness of man (Eccles, 1968, cited by Lorenz,
A paper by Leyhausen (1954, cited by Lorenz, 1963)(228)
about the relative coordination trying to take into account physiological
and psychological aspects is also mentioned. But, certainly, the
most important neurophysiological ideas in Lorenz’s work are derived
from Erich von Holst. Lorenz worked together with von Holst in
Germany and his ideas about the spontaneity of the nervous system
is one of the most important founding ideas in Lorenz’s system.
Several of von Holst’s papers are mentioned discussing the process
of central coordination (Holst, 1935a, cited by Lorenz, 1965,
the problem of everything or nothing in nervous activity (Holst,
1935b, cited by Lorenz, 1992)(230),
about locomotor reflexes in Fish (Holst, 1937, cited by Lorenz,
1978b and Holst, 1939, cited by Lorenz, 1971, 1992)(231)(232),
optical perception (Holst, 1955, cited by Lorenz, 1965 and Holst,
1957, cited by Lorenz, 1965, 1971) (233)
and his general work on the behavioural physiology of men and
animals (Holst, 1969-1970, cited by Lorenz, 1973b, 1978a, 1983)(235).
One could state that Neurophysiology is one
of the foundations of Lorenz’s concept of instinctive behaviour and also
important for his epistemological ideas. Several of the neurophysiologists
mentioned are dealing with humans.
Historically, the first citation
of psychiatry appears in the Russian Manuscript, written
from 1944 to 1948 (Lorenz, 1992). Kretschmer’s Körperbau und
Charakter (1921, cited by Lorenz, 1992)(236)
is mentioned only in the Russian Manuscript. Massermann’s
Behavior and Neuroses (1943, cited by Lorenz, 1963, 1965,
The “psychiatric drift” in Lorenz’s work is remarkable in two
more recent books on human civilization (Lorenz, 1973a, 1983).
In these polemic books, Lorenz proposes to discuss the pathology
of modern civilization. Five authors related to Psychiatry and
the problem of man in modern civilization are mentioned in these
books: Hahn (1960, cited by Lorenz, 1973a)(238),
Hargreaves (personal communication, cited by Lorenz, 1983), Czerwenka-Wenkstetten
(a conference of 1977, cited by Lorenz, 1983)(239),
Frankl (1979, cited by Lorenz, 1983)(240),
Klages (1981, cited by Lorenz, 1983)(241).
It is remarkable the citation of four books by H. Schulze: Schulze,
1963 (cited by Lorenz, 1983) (242),
Schulze, 1964 (cited by Lorenz, 1973a) (243),
Schulze, 1971 (cited by Lorenz, 1973a (244),
Schulze, 1977 (cited by Lorenz, 1983) (245),
all discussing neuroses in our contemporary living conditions
It is not surprising the influence of
Psychiatry on Lorenz writings. Lorenz was trained as a medical doctor and
the idea of normal and pathological is clearly present in his
unweltanschauung. Even considering the role of natural selection in
the evolution of living creatures, Lorenz does not deny the possibility of
the existence of patterns of behaviour that may be considered
pathological. His contact with Psychiatry was still more important in war
time, when he worked as a psychiatrist of the German Army. It is no
coincidence that ideas stemming from Psychiatry are already present in the
Russian Manuscript. His contact with patients suffering from neurosis
during his work in the war apparently exerted an enduring influence on his
view of normal and pathological aspects of human life. Lorenz’s contact
with Psychoanalysis was also possible during this period, as his chief in
the psychiatric service was Freudian. Lorenz mentions some episodes of his
work as a psychiatrist and his way of dealing with neurotic behaviour.
In sum, considering the literature related
to Psychology in Lorenz’s work, Heinroth (1910, cited by Lorenz, 1963,
1965, 1970, 1971, 1973a, 1973b, 1978a, 1978b, 1983, 1992) is the most
frequently cited work (ten times) in Lorenz’s writings. Craig (1918, cited
by Lorenz, 1963, 1965, 1970, 1971, 1973b, 1978a, 1978b, 1992) occupies the
second position with eight citations. Darwin (1872, cited by Lorenz, 1963,
1971, 1973b, 1978a, 1978b, 1983, 1992), Uexküll (1909, cited by Lorenz,
1970, 1971, 1973b, 1978a, 1978b, 1983, 1992), and Kuhn (1919, cited by
Lorenz, 1965, 1971, 1973b, 1978a, 1978b, 1983, 1992), have been cited
seven times each. Whitmann (1898, cited by Lorenz, 1970, 1971, 1973b,
1978a, 1978b, 1992), Mac Dougall (1923, cited by Lorenz, 1970, 1971,
1978a, 1978b, 1983, 1992), Tolman (1932, cited by Lorenz, 1965, 1970,
1971, 1973b, 1978a, 1992) and Spitz (1958, cited by Lorenz, 1963, 1970,
1973a, 1978a, 1978b, 1983) have been mentioned six times each. Finally,
Jennings (1906, cited by Lorenz, 1970, 1971, 1973b, 1978a, 1992), Karl
Bühler (1922, cited by Lorenz, 1971, 1973b, 1978a, 1983, 1992), Pavlov
(1927, cited by Lorenz, 1965, 1971, 1978a, 1978b, 1992), Hull (1943, cited
by Lorenz, 1965, 1970, 1971, 1973b, 1978a), Bally (1945, cited by Lorenz,
1971, 1973b, 1978a, 1978b, 1983), Harlow (1950, cited by Lorenz, 1965,
1971, 1973b, 1978a, 1983) and Brunswick (1957, cited by Lorenz, 1965,
1971, 1973b, 1978a, 1983) have been cited five times each one.
These data refer to the presence of authors
related to the psychological field of knowledge in Lorenz’s selected
works. The kind of influence (if any) these authors exerted on Lorenz’s
work is complex. Some authors may have influenced his way of thinking,
others may have been identified as assuming similar positions after Lorenz
had already taken a position (as the case of Whitman, for instance) or
being criticized for assuming diverse positions. The meaning of each one
must be understood in a particular way. This is a huge and detailed work
that we are conducting at the present moment. However, there is no simple
direction of influence, when this may be considered. Usually, the same
author is criticized by Lorenz in some aspects and this does not prevent
him from agreeing with the same author in other points. The presence of an
author does not mean that Lorenz depended on him to build his theoretical
system, but that this particular author is relevant for the discussion of
his ideas (agreeing or disagreeing). The important aspect here is that
many of the authors he discusses in his work are recognized as
representatives of the psychological area of knowledge.
Sometimes, the authors are mentioned as
belonging to the new area of research, giving identity to this area, as
the case of the presence of Heinroth (1910), the most frequently cited
author in Lorenz’s writings. It is possible to see here the efforts of
Lorenz to identify his approach with that of Heinroth, who employed both
terms, Ethology and Psychology in his work. Craig (1918) exerted some
influence on Lorenz’s ideas, especially concerning the conception of the
appetitive behaviour. In this sense, Lorenz is conservative, trying to
present his position as the continuation of a trend already extant. This
kind of attitude towards authors before him is usually present in his
works. Lorenz is continually trying to connect his ideas with a historical
movement, trying to convey that his ideas are not new, but they are
inserted in a wider scientific movement. The same may be said of Darwin
(1872). The idea of evolution is extremely important in Lorenz’s writings,
but Lorenz has never tried to follow Darwin’s points of research directly.
Uexküll (1909) was considered by Lorenz a respected master and influenced
Lorenz in the ideas of companion in the social world, the meaning of other
animals as having specific social roles. As a representative of
Phenomenology, Uexküll represents how diverse the influences on Lorenz
have been. Uexküll was not an evolutionist and this also means that
authors may be influential in some aspects but not in other ones.
Kuhn (1919) is another classic in the study
of animal behaviour from a physiological point of view. Whitman (1898) may
be considered a case similar to Heinroth. The research conducted by Lorenz
has been done independently of Whitman. The constant presence of this
author in Lorenz writings may indicate the recognizing by Lorenz (and
Heinroth) of the seminal work conducted by Whitman with pigeons. The
following authors mentioned have a conflicting influence on Lorenz’s ideas
(agreement and disagreement), although they are criticized by the author,
it is possible to note Lorenz using some of their ideas. This is the case
of Mac Dougall (1923) and Tolman (1932). The idea of intention or purpose
is important in Lorenz’s system, however he criticized vehemently what he
called the vitalists (such as MacDougall). His attempts to discriminate
teleology and teleonomy may be understood as an attempt to reformulate
some of their ideas.
The relationship of Lorenz with
Psychoanalysis is in no way only a positive or negative one. Sometimes
Lorenz criticizes psychonalytical ideas (such as the idea of the
opposition of Eros and Thanatos), in other moments he not only shows an
amazing similarity with psychoanalytical thinking (as the case of his
motivational model or the uneasiness of man in modern civilization) but he
even adopts explanatory resources from Psychoanalysis. In fact there is no
formula to describe the possibilities of discussion of Lorenz’s ideas and
the traditional schools of Psychology. In this sense, he adopted the idea
of hospitalism from Spitz (1958) and this concept presents an enduring
influence on Lorenz’s writings about the conditions of modern
civilization. The case of Jennings (1906) is similar to that of Kuhn. The
influence of traditional physiological analysis of behaviour is an
indication of the importance of this area of the biological sciences for
The most intimate contact of Lorenz with
mainstream psychologists was with Karl Bühler (1922), an important
representative of Gestalt Psychology. Bühler could be considered his most
important direct influence in the psychological field and Lorenz could be
considered, from the psychological point of view, a rather dissident and
original Gestalt psychologist. His ideas about Evolutionary Epistemology
are very influenced by psychological reasoning and quite close to Gestalt
Psychology. In sum, if Lorenz had to be included in a traditional
psychological system, we most probably should insert him in the Gestalt
movement (although he might not be considered an orthodox Gestalt
psychologist, he considered himself as heretic in regard to Gestalt
Psychology). It is noteworthy that Piaget, when discussing Lorenz’s ideas,
seems to consider Lorenz as a Gestalt psychologist.
The presence of Pavlov (1927), as it is the
case of Kuhn and Jennings, is an indication that Lorenz was interested not
only in the physiological aspects of behaviour, but also in the processes
of modification of behaviour. At this point we could state that Lorenz was
a fierce opponent of Behaviourism, including Watson and Skinner. Lorenz
criticizes the importance Behaviourism attributed to conditioning by
reinforcement, he criticizes the doctrine of the ‘empty-organism’ of
Behaviourism as responsible for a lot of problems of modern civilization
and as the basis of ‘pseudo-democracy’ and the modern decadence of human
civilization. Although these outrageous attacks against Behaviourism, his
system also includes the conditioning by reinforcement (or modification of
behaviour with feedback) as an extremly important part of his approach to
learning. So, the relationships of Lorenz with other schools of Psychology
are not always only positive or negative. Hull (1943) could be inserted in
his discussion with Behaviourism. Bally (1945), in fact, is cited as a
representative of Kurt Lewin’s idea of the relevance of a tension-free
environment for playing. Harlow (1950), and also Yerkes and Köhler, are of
particular interest for Lorenz due to his theories about the origins of
human conceptual thought. Brunswick (1957) was an assistent to Karl Bühler
and his influence is also a direct one. Brunswick’s interest in cognition
is clearly connected with Lorenz’s growing dedication to Epistemology.
This is an introductory essay pointing the
massive presence of psychological literature in Lorenz’s work and
discussing some aspects of the complex links between the psychological
field of knowledge and Konrad Lorenz’s work. Of course, detailed analysis
of the several points of contact deserve particular attention.
Ethology, and particularly Konrad Lorenz’s
work, are directly related to Psychology and its related fields. At least,
part of the roots of Ethology may be found in traditional Animal and
Comparative Psychology and Lorenz’s ideas have developed in constant
interaction with the psychological literature. Citations originated from
the most important historical systems of psychology are present in his
writings and they are relevant for his thinking (Associationism,
Structuralism, Functionalism, Gestalt Psychology, Behaviorism,
Psychoanalysis). In sum, Psychology is part of the structure of Lorenz’s
work. Other related fields, such as Psychiatry, Neurophysiology,
Epistemology, are also present in Lorenz’s writings. All this suggests
that the History of Ethology and the History of Psychology should be
understood side by side.
H.E. (1974). Grandes Experimentos da Psicologia (M. P. P. de
Toledo, Transl.). São Paulo: Cia Editora Nacional. (Original published in
Heidbreder, E. (1978). Psicologias do Século XX. 4. ed (L. S.
Blandy, Transl.). São Paulo: Mestre Jou. (Original published in 1933).
Herrnstein, R.J. & Boring, E.G. (1971).
Textos Básicos de
História da Psicologia (D. M.
Herder; EDUSP. (Original published em 1966).
Lorenz, K. (1949). Er
redete mit dem Vieh, den Vogel und den Fischen. Vienna: Borotha
Lorenz, K. (1950).
So kam der Mensch auf den Hund.
Lorenz, K. (1963). Das sogenannte Böse: Zur
Naturgeschichte der Aggression.
Lorenz, K. (1965).
Evolution and Modification of Behaviour. London: Methuen.
Lorenz, K. (1970). Studies in Animal and
Human Behaviour. v.1. (R. Martin, Transl.). Cambridge, Massachusetts:
Harvard University Press. (Original published in 1970).
Lorenz, K. (1971). Studies in Animal and
Human Behaviour. v.2. (R. Martin, Transl.). Cambridge, Massachusetts:
Harvard University Press. (Original published in 1971).
Lorenz, K. (1973a). Die acht Todsünden
der zivilisierten Menschheit. Munich: Piper.
Lorenz, K. (1973b). Die Rückseite des
Spiegels. Versuch einer Naturgeschichte menschlichen Erkennens.
Lorenz, K. (1978a). Vergleichende
Verhaltensforschung: Grundlagen der Ethologie. Vienna-New York:
Lorenz, K. (1978b). Das Wirkugsgefüge
der Natur und das Schicksal des Menschen. Gesammelte Arbeiten.
Herausgegeben und eingeleitet von Irenäus Eibl-Eibesfeldt. Munich; Zurich:
Lorenz, K. (1978c).
L’année de l‘Oie Cendré.
Paris: Editions Stock.
Lorenz, K. (1983). Der Abbau des
Menschlichen. Munich: Piper.
Lorenz, K. (1988). Hier bin Ich – Wo
bist du? – Ethologie der Graugans. Munich: Piper.
Lorenz, K. (1992) [1944-1948]. Das Russische Manuskript.
Die Naturwissenschaft vom Menschen.
Munich: Piper Verlag.
Marx, M.H. & Hillix, W.A. (1978).
Sistemas e Teorias em Psicologia. 3. ed. (A. Cabral, Transl.). São
Paulo: Cultrix. (Original published in 1973).
Mueller, F.-L. (1968). História da
Psicologia: da Antigüidade aos nossos dias (L.L. Oliveira, M. A.
Blandy & J.B.D. Penna, Transl.). São Paulo: Cia Editora Nacional; EDUSP.
(Original published in 1960).
Penna, A.G. (1978). Introdução à
História da Psicologia Contemporânea. Rio de Janeiro: Zahar.
Schultz, D.P. & Schultz, S.E. (2002).
História da Psicologia Moderna. 16th ed. (A.U. Sobral & M.S.
Gonçalves, Transl.). São Paulo: Cultrix. (Original published in 1992).
Whitman, C.O. (1898). Animal
Behavior. Biological Lectures from the Marine Biological Laboratory,
Whitman, C.O. (1919). The Behavior of Pigeons. Publ. Carnegie
Inst., 257, 1-161.(volta)
Craig, W. (1918). Appetites and aversions as constituents of instincts.
Biological Bulletin, 34 (2), 91-107.(volta)
Craig, W. (1912). Observations of young doves learning to drink.
Journal of Animal Behaviour, 2 (4).(volta)
Craig, W. (1908). The voices of Pigeons regarded as a means of
social control. American Journal of Sociology, 14.(volta)
Craig, W. (1914). Male Doves reared in isolation. Journal of
Animal Behaviour, 4 (2).(volta)
Craig, W. (1921). Why do animals fight? International Journal
of Ethics, 31.(volta)
Craig, W. (1909). The expression of emotions in the pigeons: The
blond ring-dove (Turtur risorius). Journal of Comparative
Neurology and Psych., 19 (1).(volta)
Craig, W. (1921/1922). A note on Darwin’s work on the expressions
of emotions etc. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology,
O. (1930). Über bestimmte Bewegungsweisen der Wirbeltiere. Sitzungsbericht
der Gesellschaft der naturforschenden Freunde, Berlin.(volta)
Heinroth, O. (1918). Reflektorische Bewegungen bei Vögeln. Journal
für Ornithologie, 66.(volta)
Heinroth, O. (1910). Beiträge zur Biologie, namentlich Ethologie
und Psychologie der Anatiden. Verhandlungen des V. Internationalen
Ornithologen-Kongresses, Berlin, pp. 589-702.(volta)
Huxley, J.S. & Howard, E. (1934). Field studies and psychology:
a further correlation. Nature, 133.(volta)
Darwin, C. (1872). The Expression of the Emotions in Man and
Animals. London: Appleton.(volta)
Spencer, H. (1855-1872). Principles of Psychology.(volta)
Lloyd Morgan, C. (1909). Instinkt und Ganzheit. Leipzig
and Berlin: Teubner.(volta)
Lloyd Morgan, C. (1913). Instinkt und Erfahrung. Berlin:
W. (1923). An Outline of Psychology. London: Methuen.(volta)
W. (1923). An Introduction to Social Psychology. Boston.(volta)
MacDougall, W. (1921-1922). The use and abuse of instinct in social
psychology. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology,
Hinde, R.A. (1972). Animal behavior: a synthesis of ethology
and comparative psychology. New York: McGraw-Hill.(volta)
Brun, E. (1912). Zur Psychologie der künstlichen Allianz kolonien
bei den Ameisen. Biologisches Zentralblatt, 32.(volta)
F. (1916). Der Ameisenlöwe: Eine biologische, tierpsychologische
und reflexbiologische Untersuchung. Jena.(volta)
Katz, D. & Revesz, G. (1909). Experimentelle psychologische
Untersuchungen an Hühnen. Zeitschrift für Psychologie,
Katz, D. (1931). Hunger und Appetit. Leipzig.(volta)
Russell, E.R. (1934). The Behaviour of Animal. London.(volta)
Buytendijk, F.J.J. (1940). Wege zum Verständniss der Tiere.
Zürich & Leipzig: Max Niehaus Verlag.(volta)
Hebb, D.O. (1940). The Organization of Behaviour. New York.(volta)
Hebb, D.O. (1953). Heredity and environment in mammalian behaviour.
British Journal of Animal Behavior, 1, 43-47.(volta)
Hebb, D.O. (1958). A Textbook of Psychology. Philadelphia:
Herrick, F.H. (n.d.) Instinct. Western Res. Univ. Bulletin,
(32) Bierens de Haan, J.A. (1933). Der
Stieglitz als Schöpfer. Journal für Ornithologie, 80
(33) Bierens de Haan, J.A. (1935). Probleme
des tierischen Instinktes. Naturwissenschaften, 23:
(34) Bierens de Haan, J.A. (1940).
Instinkte und ihr Umbau durch Erfahrung.
Ziegler, H.E. (1920). Der Begriff des Instinktes einst und
R. (1957). Instinct in man. London.(volta)
Thorpe, W.H. (1948). The modern concept of instinctive behaviour.
Bulletin of Animal Behaviour, 7.(volta)
Thorpe, W.H. (1956). Learning and Instinct in Animal. London:
Thorpe, W.H. (1965). Science, Man and Morals. London: Methuen.(volta)
Schjelderup-Ebbe, T. (1922-1923). Zur Sozialpsychologie des Haushuhnes.
Zeitschrift für Psychologie, 87.(volta)
Schjelderup-Ebbe, T. (1924). Zur Sozialpsychologie der Vögel.
Zeitschrift für Psychologie.(volta)
Alverdes, F. (1925). Tiersoziologie. Leipzig.(volta)
Brückner, G.H. (1933). Untersuchungen zur Tiersoziologie, insbesondere
zur Auflösung der Familie. Zeitschrift für Psychologie,
Uexküll, J. von (1909). Umwelt und Innenleben der Tiere.
Uexküll, J. von (1920). Theoretische Biologie.(volta)
Uexküll, J. von (1934). Streifzüge durch die Umwelten von Tieren
und Menschen. Berlin.(volta)
Hediger, H. (1934). Zur Biologie und Psychologie der Flucht bei
Tieren. Biologishces Zentralblatt, 54, 21-40.(volta)
Hediger, H. (1935). Zur Biologie und Psychologie der Zahmheit.
Archiv für Psychologie, 93.(volta)
Hediger, H. (1942). Wildtiere in Gefangenschaft. Basel:
Hediger, H. (1954). Skizzen zu einer Tierpsychologie im Zoo
und im Zirkus. Zurich: Gutenberg.(volta)
Hediger, H. (1955). Studies of the psychology and behavior
of captive animals in zoos and circuses. London.(volta)
Portielje, J.A. (1926). Zur Ethologie, beziehungsweise Psychologie
von Botaurus stellaris, 15 (1-2).(volta)
Portielje, J.A. (1927). Zur Ethologie, beziehungsweise Psychologie
von Phalacrocorax carbo subcormoranus, 16 (2-3).(volta)
Portielje, J.A. (1928). Dieren zien en leeren kennen. Amsterdam:
Zeeb, K. (1964). Zirkusdressur und Tierpsychologie. Mitteilungen
der Nationalen Forschungsgesellschaft (Bern), NF, 21.(volta)
Makkink, G.F. (1960). An attempt at an ethogram of the european
avocet (Recurvirostra avocetta L.) with ethological and
psychological remarks. Ardea, 25, 1-60.(volta)
Klüver, H. (1933). Behaviour Mechanisms in Monkey. Chicago:
Yerkes, R.M. (1943). Chimpanzees: a laboratory colony.
New Haven: Yale University Press.(volta)
Harlow, H.F. & McClean, F.G. (1954). Object discrimination
learned by monkeys on basis of manipulation motives. Journal
of Comparative Physiology and Psychology, 47.(volta)
Harlow, H.F. (1960). The maternal and infantile affectional
Harlow, H.F. (1960). Primary affectional patterns in primates.
American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 30.(volta)
Harlow, H.F.; Meyer, D.R. & Harlow, M.K. (1950). Learning
motivated by a manipulation drive. Journal for Experimental
Psychology, 40, 228-234.(volta)
Harlow, H.F. & Harlow, M.K. (1962). The effect of rearing
conditions on behavior. Bull. Menninger Clinic, 26,
Harlow, H.F. & Harlow, M.K. (1962). Social Deprivation in
Monkeys. Scientific American, 207, 137-146.(volta)
Gardner, R.A. & Gardner, B.T. (1967). Acquisition of sign
language in the chimpanzee. Univ. Nevada Progr. Report (ms).(volta)
Gardner, R.A. & Gardner, B.T. (1969). Teaching sign language
to a chimpanzee. Science, 165: 664-672.(volta)
Gardner, R.A. & Gardner, B.T. (1971). Two-way communication
with an infant chimpanzee. In: A. Schreier & F. Stollnitz
(Eds). Behavior of Nonhuman Primates (vol 4, pp. 117-184).
New York/London: Academic Press.(volta)
D. (1971). Language in the chimpanzee? Science, 172,
(69) Premack, D. (1976). Intelligence in Ape
New York: Willey.(volta)
Hayes, C. (1951). The Ape in Our House. New York: Harper
Carpenter, C.R. (1934). A Field Study of the Behavior and Social
Relations of Howling Monkeys. Comp. Psychol. Monogr., 10,
Jennings, H.S. (1906). Behaviour of the lower organisms.
Loeb, J. (1913). Die Tropismen. Handbuch der Vergleichenden
(74) Kühn, A. (1919). Die Orientierung der Tiere
Jena: Gustav Fischer.(volta)
(75) Wundt, W. (1922).
die Menschen- und Tierseele.
Thorndike, E.L.C. (1911). Animal Intelligence. New York:
Pavlov, I.P. (1926). Die höchte Nerventätigkeit bei Tieren.
Pavlov, I.P. (1927). Conditioned reflexes: an investigation
of the activity of the cerebral cortex. London.(volta)
Bechterev, W. (1926). Reflexologie des Menschen. Leipzig
Anokhin, P.K. (1961). A new conception of the Physiological Architecture
of conditioned reflex. In Brain Mechanisms and Learning
(pp. 189-229). Oxford: Blackwell.(volta)
Hogan, J.A. & Adler, N. (1963). Classical conditioning and
punishment of an instinctive response in Betta splendens.
Animal Behaviour, 11, 351-354.(volta)
(82) Lidell, H.S. (1934). The conditioned reflex.
F.A. Moss (Ed.)
Comparative Psychology (pp.
247-296). New York: Prentice-Hall.(volta)
Lidell, H.S. (1944). Conditioned reflex method and experimental
neurosis. In: J.M.V. Hunt (Ed.) Personality and the Behavior
Disorders (V.I., pp. 389-412). New York: Ronald.(volta)
Helmholz, H.L.F von (1856-1867). Handbuch der physiologischen
Helmholz, H.L.F von (1877). Das Denken in der Medizin.(volta)
Helmholz, H.L.F von (1878). Ueber die Tatsachen in der Wahrnehmung.(volta)
Helmholz, H.L.F von (1882-1895). Abhandlungen.(volta)
Helmholz, H.L.F von (1887). Zählen und Messen erkenntnistheoretisch
Helmholz, H.L.F von (1897-1898). Vorlesungen über theoretische
Helmholz, H.L.F von (1921). Schriften zur Erkenntnistheorie.(volta)
Ehrenfels, C. von (1904). Über Gestaltqualitäten. Vierteljahresschrift
für Wissenschaftliche Philosophie, 14, 249-292.(volta)
W. (1915). Intelligenzprüfungen an Anthropoiden. I. Abhandlungen
der Preussischer Akademie, Wiss Phys-mathem. Kl (Berlin).(volta)
Köhler, W. (1921). Intelligenzprüfungen an Menschenaffen.
Köhler, W. (1973). The Mentality of Apes. 2. Ed. Routledge
& Kegan Paul.(volta)
Bühler, C. (1922). Das Seelenleben des Jugendlichen. Jena.(volta)
Bühler, C. (1927). Das Problem des Instinktes. Zeitschrift
für Psychologie, 103.(volta)
Bühler, K. (1922). Handbuch der Psychologie, I. Teil: Die
Struktur der Wahrnemungen, Jena.(volta)
(98) Bühler, K. (1922). Die geistige Entwicklung
Jena: Gustav Fischer.(volta)
(99) Bühler, K. (1936).
Zukunft der Psychologie.
Metzger, W. (1936). Gesetze des Sehens. Frankfurt.
Metzger, W. (1953). Psychologie. Darmstadt: Steinkoppf.
Sander, F. (1928). Experimentelle Ergebnisse der Gestaltpsychologie.
Berichte des 10. Kongress für experimentelle Psychologie. Jena.
Matthaei, R. (1929). Das Gestaltproblem. München: Bergmann.
Alverdes, F. (1932). Die Ganzheitsbetrachtung in der Biologie.
Sitzungsbericht der Gesellschaftzur Förderung des ges. Nturwiss.
zu Marburg, 67.
Koehler, O. (1933). Die Ganzheitsbetrachtung in der modernen Biologie.
Verh. Der Könisberger gelehrten Gesellschaft.
Freud, S. (1905). Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality.
Freud, S. (1917). Introductory lectures on psycho-analysis.
1916-1917. Part III, General theory of neuroses (1917). Lecture
on fixation to traumas: the unconscious.
Freud, S. (1930). Vorlesungen zur Einführung in die Psychoanalyse.
Freud, S. (1950). Gesammelte Werke. London: Imago.
Feuerborn, H.J. (1939). Der Instinktbegriff und die Archetypen
C.G. Jungs. Biologia Generalis, 14.
Alverdes, F. (1937). Die Wirksamkeit von Archetypen in den Instinkthandlungen
der Tiere. Zoologischer Anzeiger, 119.
Friedmann, H. (1934). The instinctive emotional life of birds.
The Psychoanalytical Review, 21 (3/4).
Spitz, R.A. (1945). Hospitalism. The psychoanalitical study
of the child, 1: 53-74.
(114) Spitz, R.A. (1958). La première année
de la vie de l’enfant. Paris:
Presses Universitaires de France.
Bowlby, J. (1952). Maternal care and mental health. World
Health Organization. Monograph Series 2.
Bowlby, J. (1958). The nature of the child’s tie to his mother.
Int. J. of Psychoanalysis, 39, 350-373.
Erikson, E.H. (1953). Wachstum und Krisen der gesunden Persönlichkeit.
Erikson, E.H. (1964). Insight and Responsibility. New York:
(119) Erikson, E.H. (1966). Ontogeny of Ritualization
in Man. Philos. Transct. Royal Society of
251 B, 337-349.
Fromm, E. (1974). Anatomie der menschlichen Destruktivitat.
Stuttgart: Deutsche Verlagsanstalt.
Mitscherlich, A. (1963). Die vaterlose Gesellschaft. München:
Watson, J.B. (1913). Psychology as the behaviorist views it. Psychological
Review, 20, 158-177.
Watson, J.B. (1930). Der Behaviorismus. Stuttgart: Deutsche
Skinner, B.F. (1936). Conditioning and extinction and their relation
to drive. Journal of General Psychology, 14, 296-317.
Skinner, B.F. (1938). The Behavior of Organisms. New York:
Skinner, B. F. (1958). Reinforcement Today. American Psychologist,
Skinner, B. F. (1971). Beyond Freedom and Dignity. New
Hull, C.L. (1943). Principles of Behavior. New York: Appleton-Century.
Tolman, E.C. (1932). Purposive behaviour in animals and men.
New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
(130) Garcia, J.A. & Koelling, R.A. (1967).
comparison of aversions induced by X rays, toxins and drugs in
the rat. Radiation Research Supplement, 7, 439-450.
(131) Garcia, J. & Ervin, F.R. (1967).
neuropsychological approach to appropriateness of signals and
specificity of reinforcers. Proc. of Intern. Neuropsychology
Garcia, J.; McGowan, B.K.; Ervin, F.R. & Koelling, R.A. (1968).
Cues: Their relative Effectiveness as a Function of the Reinforcer.
Science, 160, 794-795.
Garcia, J.; Hankins, W.G. & Rusiniak, K.W. (1974). Behavioral
regulation of the milieu interne in man and rat. Science,
Bavelas, A. (1957). Group size – Interaction and structural environment.
Group processes. Transaction of the Fourth Conference,
1957. New York: The Josiah Macy Jr. Foundation.
Milgram, A. (1963). Behavioral Study of Obedience. Journal
of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67, 372-378.
Gehlen, A. (1960). Die Seele im technischen Zeitalter.
Sozialpsychologische Probleme in der industriellen Gesellschaft.
Bischof, N. (n.d.). Aristoteles, Galileu, Kurt Lewin – und die
Folgen. Zeitschrift für Sozialpsychologie.
Bischof, N. (1972). Die biologischen Grundlagen der Inzesttabus.
In Reinert (ed) Bericht über den 27. Kongress der Deutschen
Gesellschaft für Psychologie, Kiel. Göttingen: Verlag für
Volkelt, H. (1914). Die Vorstellungen der Tiere: Arbeiten zur
Entwicklungespsychologie. F. Krueger.
Schneirla, T.C. (1966). Behavioral Development and Comparative
Psychology. Quart. Ver. Biol, 41, 283-302.
Volkelt, H. (1937). Tierpsychologie als genetische Ganzheitpsychologie.
Zeitschrift für Tierpsychologie, 1 (1), 49-65.
Carmichael, L. (1926). The developent of behaviour in vertebrates
experimentally removed from the influence of external stimulation.
Psychological Review, 33.
Birch, H.G. (1945). The relation of previous experience to insightful
problem-solving. J. Comp. Psychol, 38.
(144) Riess, P.E. (1954). The Effect of Altered
Environment and of Age on the Mother-Young Relationships among
NY Acad. Sci.,
Hess, E.H. (1959). Imprinting, an Effect of Early Experience.
Science, 130, 133-141.
Hess, E.H. (1973). Imprinting: Early Experience and the development
of Psychology of Attachment. New York: van Nostrand.
Schutz, F. (1964). Die Bedeutung früher sozialer Eindrücke während
der “Kinder- und Jugendzeit” bei Enten. Z. Exptl Angew. Psychol.,
Gottlieb, G. (1965). Imprinting in relation to Parental and Species
Identification by Avian Neonates. J. Comp physiol. Psychol.,
Kruijt, J. (1971). Early experience and the development of social
behaviour in Jungle Fowl. Psychiatr. Neurol. Neurochir.,
Freedman, D.G. (1964). Smiling in Blind Infants and the Issue
of Innate vs. Acquired. J. Child Psychol. Psychiat., 5,
Freedman, D.G. (1965). Hereditary Control of Early Social Behavior.
In B.M. Foss (Ed.). Determinants of Infant Behavior III.
Peiper, A. (1935). Die ‘Instinkte’ des Neugeborenen. Z. Psychol,
Peiper, A. (1961). Die Eigenart der kindlichen Hirntätigkeit.
3. Aufl. Leipzig.
(154) Prechtl, H.F.R.; Knol, A.R. (1958). Die Fussohlenreflexe
beim neugeboren Kind. Archiv
Psychiatrie und Z. für die Gesamte Neurologie,
Groos, K. (1907). Die Spiele der Tiere.
Bally, G. (1945). Vom Ursprung und den Grenzen der Freiheit.
Eine Deutung des Spielens bei Tier und Mensch. Basel: Birkhäuser.
T.G. (1971). The object in the world of the infant. Scientific
American, 225 (4), 30-38.
Eigen, M.; Winkler, R. (1975). Das Spiel. Naturgesetze steuern
den Zufall. Munich/Zurich: Piper.
Werner, H. (1933). Entwicklungspsychologie. Leipzig.
Schroeder, P. (1931). Kindliche Charaktere und ihre Abartigkeiten.
R. (1953). Beitrag zur Entwicklung des Physiognomie – und Mimikerkennens.
Z. exp. Angew. Psychol., 2, 412-454, 599-633.
Jander, R. (1957). Die optische Richtungsorientierung der roten
Waldameisen (Formica rufa L.). Z. vgl. Physiol.,
Hoffman, K. (1954). Versuche zu der im Richtungsfinden der Vögel
enthaltenen Zeitschätzung. Z. Tierpsychol, 11, 453-475.
Sauer, F. (1961). Further studies on the stellar orientation of
nocturnally migrating birds. Psychologische Forschung,
Hoffmann, K. (1952). Die Einrechnung der Sonnenwanderung bei der
Richtungsweisung des sonnenlos aufgezogenen Stares. Naturwissenschaften,
Engelmann, W. (1928). Untersuchungen über die Schallokalisation
bei Tieren. Z. für Psychologie, 105.
Fraenkel, G.S. & Gunn, S.D. (1961). The Orientation of
Animals. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
E.H. (1956) Space perception in the chick. Scientific American,
Bateson, P.P.G. (1964). An effect of imprinting on the perceptual
development of domestic chicks. Nature, 202, 421-422.
(170) Ball, W. & Tronick, E. (1971). Infant
responses to impending collision: optical and real. Science,
Bingham, H. (1913). Size and form perception in Gallus domesticus.
Journal of Animal Behavior.
Frisch, K. von (1914). Der Darbensinn und Formensinn der Biene.
Zool. Jahrb., 35, 1-188.
Hertz, M. (1937). Beitrag zum Farbensinn und Formensinn der Biene.
Z. vgl. Physiol., 24, 413-421.
T.G. (1966). Slant Perception and Shape Constancy in Infants.
Science, 151, 832-834.
Kneutgen, J. (1970). Eine Musikform und ihre Biologische Funktion.
Über die Wirkungsweise der Wiegenlieder. Z. für exp. u. angew.
Psychol., 17 (2), 245-265.
(176) Birdwhistell, R.L. (1963). The kinesis level
in the investigation of the emotions. In: P. H. Knapp (Ed), Expressions
of the Emotions in Man.
New York: Int. Univ. Press.
Birdwhistell, R.L. (1970). Kinesis and Context. Philadelphia:
Univ. of Pennsylvania Press.
Hückstedt, B. (1965). Experimentelle Untersuchungen zum ‘Kindchenschema”.
Z. exp. und angew. Psychologie, 12, 421-450.
Beach, F.H. & Jaynes, J. (1956). Studies of maternal retrieving
in rats. III. Senrory cues involved in the lactating female’s
response to her young. Behaviour, 10, 104-125.
N.R.F. (1929). Reasoning in white rats. Comparative Psychology
Monographs, 6, 29.
Maier, N.R.F. (1930). Reasoning in humans. I. On direction. J.
of Comp Psychology, 10, 115-143.
Hopp, G. (1970). Evolution der Sprache und Vernunft. Berlin:
N.H. (1964). Mimik und Pantomimik. In R. Kirchoff (ed.). Handb.
d. Psychol. 5, Ausdruckspsychologie (pp. 351-421).
Birdwhistell, R.L. (1968). Communication without words. In P.
Alexander (Ed). L’Aventure Humaine. Paris.
Frisch, K. von (1923). Über die Sprache der Bienen. Zool. B.
Abt. Physiol, 40.
Hirsch, J.; Lindley, R.H. & Tolman, E.C. (1955). An experimental
test of an alleged innate sign stimulus. J. comp. Phys. and
Butler, R.A. (1953). Discrimination Learning by Rhesus Monkeys
to Visual Exploration Motivation. Journal of Comp. physiol.
Psychol, 46, 95-98.
Foppa, K. (1966). Lernen, Gedächtnis, Verhalten. Ergebnisse
und Probleme der Lernspsychologie. Köln: Kiepenheuer und Witsch.
Bischof, N. (1966). Erkenntnishteoretische Grundlagenprobleme
der Wahrnemungspsychologie. Hand. d. Pscyhol, I:
21-78. Gottingen: Hogrefe.
Decker, H. (n.d.). Das Denken in Begriffen als Kriterium der Menschwerdung.
Labarre, W. (1947). The Cultural Basis of Emotions and Gestures.
Journal of Personality, 16: 49-68.
Stellar, E. (1954). The physiology of motivation. Psychol.
Review, 61: 5-22.
Roberts, W.W. & Kiess, H.O. (1964). Motivational Properties
of Hypothalamic Aggression in Cat. J. comp. Physiol. Psychol.,
Leyhausen, P. (1965). Das Motivationsproblem in der Etholoige.
Hdbch Psychol. Bd Motivationslehre, Göttingen.
Bohr, N. (1958). On atoms and human knowledge. Daedalus
(American Academy of Arts and Sciences), Spring, 1958.
Bridgman, P. (1958). Remarks on Niels Bohr’s talk. Daedalus
(American Academy of Arts and Sciences), Spring, 1958.
Planck, M. (1942). Sinn und Grenzen der exakten Wissenschaft.
Baumgarten, E. (1933). Franklin-Studies. Leipzig: Hinzel.
Baumgarten, E. (1938). Der Pragmatismus. Frankfurt; Main:
Baumgarten, E. (1941). Allgemeine elementare Philosophie
I. Ms. Königsberger Vorlesung.
Baumgarten, E. (1950). Versuch über die menschlichen Gesellchaften
und das Gewissen. Studium Generale, 3, 10.
Dewey, J. (1925). Experience and Nature. Chicago and London:
Open Court Publishing.
Dewey, J. (1936). Reconstruction in Philosophy. New York:
Brunswik, E. (1934). Wahrnemung und Gegenstandwelt, Psychologie
vom Gegenstand her. Leipzig and Vienna.
Brunswik, E. (1952). The Conceptual Framework of Psychology.
Chicago: Chicago University Press.
Brunswik, E. (1957). Scope and aspects of the cognitive problem.
In: J.S. Bruner et al. (Eds) Contemporary approaches to cognition.
Cambridge (Mass): Harvard University Press.
Campbell, D.T. (1958). Methodological suggestions for a comparative
psychology of knowledge processes. Oslo Univ. Press, Inquiry.
Campbell, D.T. (1966a). Pattern matching as an essential in distal
knowing. In K.R. Hammond (Ed.). The psychology of Egon Brunswik.
New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
(209) Campbell, D.T. (1966b). Evolutionary Espitemology.
In P.A. Schilpp (Ed). The
Philosophy of Karl R. Popper.
La Salle: Open Court Publishing.
Bell, C. (1830). The Nervous System of the Human Body.
Bernard, C. (1872). Physiologie générale.
Müller, J. (1833-1840). Handbuch der Physiologie des Menschen.
Sherrington, C.S. (1906). The integrative action of the nervous
system. New York: Scribner’s.
Sherrington, C.S. (1931). Quantitative management of contraction
in lowest level coordination. Brain, 54:1-28.
Weiss, P. (1941). Autonomous versus reflexogenous activity of
the central nervous system. Proc. Am. Phil. Soc, 84.
Hess, W.R. & Brügger, M. (1943). Das subkortikale Zentrum
der affektiven Abwehrreaktion. Helvetica Physiologica et Phamacologica
Grey Walter, W. (1953). The Living Brain. London: Gerald
Hess, W.R. (1954). Das Zwischenhirn. 2. Aufl. Basel: Schwabe.
Hess, W.R. (1957). Die Formatio reticularis des Hirnstammes im
verhaltensphysiologischen Aspekte. Psychiatr. Nervenkr.,
Mark, V.H. & Ervin, F.R. (1970). Violence and the Brain.
New York: Harper & Row.
Beach, F.H. (1942). Analysis of Factors Involved in the Arousal,
Maintenance, and Manifestation of Sexual Excitement in Male Animals.
Psychosomatic Med., 4, 173-198.
Beach, F.A . (1948). Hormones and Behavior. New York: Cooper
Richter, C. P. (1954). Behavioral Regulators of Carbohydrate Homeostasis.
Acta Neurovegetativa, 9, 247-259.
Hassler, R. & Bak, I.J. (1966). Submikroskopishce Catecholaminspeicher
als Angriffspunkte der Psychopharmaka Reserpin und Mono-Amino-Oxidase-Hemmer.
Der Nervenarzt, 37, 493-498.
Eccles, J.C. (1953). The Neurophysiological Basis of Mind:
The Principles of Neurophysiology. London: Oxford University
Eccles, J. C. (1966). Brain and Conscious Experience. New
(227) Eccles, J. C. (1968). Uniqueness of
In J.D. Roslansky (Ed.). Amsterdam: North Holland.
Leyhausen, P. (1954). Die Entdeckung der relativen Koordination:
Ein Beitrag zur Annäherung von Physiologie und Psychologie. Studium
Generale, 7, 45-60.
Holst, E. von (1935a). Über den Prozess der zentralnervösen Koordination.
Pflüg. Arch, 236, 149-158.
Holst, E. von (1935b). Alles oder Nichts: Block, Alternans,
Bigemini und Verwandte Phänomene als Eigenschaften des Rückenmarks.
Pflügers Archiv. f. d. gesamte Physiologie, 236.
Holst, E. von (1937). Bausteine zu einer vergleichenden Physiologie
der lokomotorischen Reflexe bei Fischen. II. Z. vgl. Physiologie,
Holst, E. von (1939). Entwurf eines Systems der lokomotorischen
Perioden bildung bei Fischen; ein kritischer Beitrag zum Gestaltproblem.
Z. vergl. Physiologie, 26.
Holst, E. von (1955). Regelvorgänge in der optischen Wahrnehmung.
Rept 5th Conf. Soc. Biol. Rhythm. Stockholm.
Holst, E. von (1957). Aktive Leistung der menschlichen Gesichtswahrnemung.
Studium Generale, 4, 231-243.
Holst, E. von (1969-1970). Zur Verhaltensphysiologie bei Tieren
und Menschen. Munich/Zurich: Piper.
Kretschmer, E. (1921). Körperbau und Charakter.
J.H. (1943). Behavior and Neuroses. Chicago: University
of Chicago Press.
Hahn, K. (1960). Die List des Gewissens. In: Erziehung
und Politik. Minna Specht zu ihrem 80. Geburtstag. Frankfurt:
Czerwenka-Wenkstetten, G. (1977). Das ‘leere’ Gesicht.
Frankl, V. E. (1979). Der Mensch von der Frage nach dem Sinn.
Munich; Zurich: Piper.
Klages, L. (1981). Der Geist als Widersacher der Seele.
6.ed. Bonn: Bouvier.
Schulze, H. (1963). Das Ganzsituationserlebnis in der Neurosentherapie.
Pr. d. Psychotherapie.
Schulze, H. (1964). Der progressiv domestizierte Mensch und
seine Neurosen. München: Lehmann.
Schulze, H. (1971). Das Prinzip Handeln in der Psychotherapie.
Schulze, H. (1977). Nesthocker Mensch. Stuttgart: Enke.
Note on the author
Garcia – Researcher
and professor of the Graduate Course in Psychology, Federal University
of Espírito Santo (UFES), Brazil. Areas of research: History
and Epistemology of Psychology and Ethology and Interpersonal
Relationship. The author obtained his title of Doctor in Psychology
at the University of São Paulo. Address: Av. Des.
Cassiano Castelo, 369, Manguinhos/Serra – ES, CEP 29173-037,
Data de recebimento:
Data de aceite:
Memorandum, 5, out/2003
Belo Horizonte: UFMG;
Ribeirão Preto: USP.