Chapter II psychic reflection. General idea of the psyche. Mental Reflection Main Characteristics of Mental Reflection

Psychic reflection not mirror, not passive, it is associated with search, choice, and is a necessary side of human activity.

Mental reflection is characterized by a number of features:

it makes it possible to correctly reflect the surrounding reality;
occurs in the process of active activity;
deepens and improves;
refracted through individuality;
is anticipatory.

Mental reflection ensures the appropriateness of behavior and activity. At the same time, the mental image itself is formed in the process of objective activity. Mental activity is carried out through many special physiological mechanisms. Some of them ensure the perception of influences, others - their transformation into signals, others - planning and regulation of behavior, etc. All this complex work ensures the active orientation of the organism in the environment.

The most important organ of mental activity is the cerebral cortex, which ensures complex human mental activity.

In human mental life, a special role belongs to the frontal lobes. Numerous clinical data show that damage to the frontal lobes of the brain, along with a decrease in mental abilities, entails a number of disorders in the personal sphere of a person.

Basic functions of the psyche– ensuring adaptation

1. reflection of the surrounding reality

2. ensuring the integrity of the body

3. regulation of behavior (2)

Mental processes:

The basic concepts of general psychology are mental processes(cognitive, volitional, emotional), mental properties (temperament, character, abilities, orientation) and mental states (2).

"mental process"– emphasizes the procedural nature of the mental phenomenon being studied.

"mental condition"– characterizes a static moment, the relative constancy of a mental phenomenon.

"mental property"– reflects the stability of the phenomenon under study, its recurrence and consolidation in the structure of the personality.

Mental criteria:

Severtsov: the psyche is a factor of evolution. What environment does the organism live in, what are its vital tasks, and is the psyche needed to solve them?

Hypothesis about the origin of sensitivity:

2 types of environment

The first form of the psyche is sensitivity, the ability to feel. This special case irritability.

Irritability– the ability to reflect something vital.

Sensitivity– the ability to reflect biologically neutral (abiotic) properties of the environment, which are objectively related to biotic properties and seem to indicate them.

Psyche performs signaling function.

3 parts of action (Halperin):

1. Approximate – here you already need the psyche to prepare the movement

2. Executive

3. Test

The prognostic function of the psyche is necessary for managing one’s behavior.

A higher type of sensitivity is differentiated sensations.

The transition from irritability to feelings is a complication and narrowing of the functions of organs, their specialization as sensory organs.

Individual – a single natural being, a living individual as a representative of its species, as a bearer of individually unique traits, as a subject of its life activity. An individual from birth is any individual animal or human.

Subject- individual as carrier activity. The subject of activity can be both an animal and a person ( see Activity). In some cases, the subject may be a group (for example, a nation, society, etc.).

Human – a living being, representing the highest level of development of life, a subject of social relations and activities; has the ability to work, creating tools and products of labor, the ability to establish and develop social relations mediated social norms and speech, the ability for logical thinking, imagination and conscious reflection. As an individual, a person is capable of free will, i.e. to the implementation of behavior that is determined only by one’s own conscious decision and volitional efforts aimed at implementing the decision made.

Activity – universal characteristic of living beings, expressed in maintaining and transforming vital connections with the outside world, i.e. in interaction. Activity is characterized conditionality performed acts (actions) to a greater extent internal states of the subject immediately at the moment of action than by previous external influences. In this sense, activity is opposed to reactivity. In animals, activity appears in the form adaptive life activity, in humans - in the form activities.

Behavior – interaction with the environment characteristic of living beings, mediated by their external (motor) and internal (mental) activity, a system characterized by purposeful nature of consistent actions, thanks to which the body makes practical contact with nature. Attempts to scientifically explain P. in different time relied on mechanistic determinism (by analogy with the interaction of physical bodies) and biological determinism (C. Darwin, I.P. Pavlov). Behaviorism limited P. to a set of only externally observable motor reactions in response to external stimuli, and thereby contrasted P., accessible to external observation, with consciousness, because According to behaviorists, introspective methods of cognition are unreliable and biased. This position of behaviorism led to the fact that the holistic activity of living beings was separated into external (motor) and internal (mental), which accordingly began to be studied using various methods. Therefore, in modern psychology, behavior is often understood as that activity of living beings (including moments of immobility) that can be observed from the outside, and to denote the holistic activity of living beings in the unity of its external and internal components, the terms "activity"(in humans) and “life activity” (A.N. Leontiev).

Reflection– a philosophical category denoting the universal property of matter, consisting in the object's ability(reflective) reproduce in own characteristics and in accordance with its nature the properties of another object(reflected). Reflection occurs only as a result of interaction between objects. Character of reflection depends on the level of organization of matter, therefore it differs qualitatively in inorganic and organic nature. At the level of the organism, reflection can appear in the form irritability (as the ability of living matter to respond to influence with a selective reaction corresponding to the characteristics of the stimulus, arising under the influence of external and internal stimuli) and sensitivity (as the ability to have sensations - primary mental images of the environment that arise in the process of activity that is adequate to the ecological uniqueness of a given organism and its needs and serves the purpose of regulating this activity).

Irritability --(English) irritability) - An elementary prepsychic form of reflection, characteristic of all living systems. It is expressed in the ability of living systems (organisms) to respond to biologically significant external influences with certain functional and structural changes. It manifests itself in different ways, depending on the complexity of the living system. Covers a wide range of phenomena (diffuse reactions of protoplasm in the simplest living beings, phototropisms, chemotropisms, mechanotropisms, complex, highly specialized reactions of the human body). These changes in a living system constitute the essence of the prepsychic reflection - irritability (synonym - excitability).

Comments. In the light of modern scientific data, the psyche in its rudimentary form ( sensitivity,T. e. abilities of sensation) arose from irritability living beings like active reflection them environmental changes that are vital for them regulating them behavior.

Leontiev identified the main stages of development of the psyche (sensitivity) in the process of evolution ( sensory psyche, perceptual psyche, intellect, consciousness) and, based on cultural-historical theory L.WITH.Vygotsky,showed socio-historical specifics development of the human psyche (transition to consciousness).

Sensitivity(English) sensitivity) – the ability for an elementary form of mental reflection - feeling.It is with sensitivity, according to the hypothesis A.N.Leontyev And A.IN.Zaporozhets,begins mental development V phylogeny.Unlike irritability The concept of “Sensitivity” uses the signalness criterion: sensitivity - reflection by the body of influences that are not directly biologically significant (for example, due to one’s energetic weakness), But can signal about availability(change) other environmental conditions that are vital(necessary or dangerous). Sensitivity allows you to direct (guide) the body To vital necessary components environment or from unfavorable and dangerous components of the environment. To ensure sensitivity. special bodies are required ( receptors), which react to biologically insignificant effects.

Psyche– a special property of highly organized matter, consisting in active reflection subject of the surrounding world. Based on the subjective pictures of the world are realized self-regulation behavior. The psyche is characteristic of living beings who have sensitivity(Unlike irritability, A.N. Leontiev). Higher animals (some of the mammals) are characterized by perfect shape background mental reflection. But only in a person can the psyche appear in its highest form- in the form of consciousness.

Sensory psyche- the simplest form of mental reflection ( elementary sensitivity), described by A.N. Leontyev. Consists of reflection individual properties objective reality. Animals with a sensory psyche are characterized by instinctive forms of behavior - rigidly programmed reactions to individual properties of the environment. Sensory psyche is similar to mental process Feel in humans. However, in humans, sensations have cultural and historical specificity, they have the properties of awareness, arbitrariness, and mediation (see. Higher mental functions).

Perceptual psyche-- the second most complex form of mental reflection (sensitivity), described by A.N. Leontyev. It consists of reflecting objects and phenomena as a whole, in the totality of their properties, i.e. in the form of images. This stage of mental development allows the subject to objective perception. Animals capable of reflecting in the form of images are characterized by skills, i.e. forms of behavior that are acquired through individual experience through exercise (as opposed to instincts). Perceptual psyche is analogous to mental process perception Higher mental functions).

Intelligence (practical) – a form of mental reflection (sensitivity) characteristic of higher mammals, described by A.N. Leontyev. Consists of reflecting objects and phenomena in their connections and relationships (reflection of interdisciplinary connections) Living beings with this form of psyche are characterized by complex forms of behavior that provide greater opportunities for adaptation and transfer of skills to new conditions. This form of psyche is similar to the mental process thinking in humans. However, in humans, perception has cultural and historical specificity, has the properties of awareness, arbitrariness, and mediation (see. Higher mental functions).

Consciousness– the highest form of mental reflection and self-regulation characteristic only of humans. Empirically, consciousness appears as a continuously changing set of sensory and mental images that directly appear before the subject in his internal experience, which anticipate and regulate human activity. Consciousness allows a person to reflect objects and phenomena of reality in their objective and sustainable properties, as well as its subjective attitude towards them (“I” and “not-I”). By its origin, consciousness is social and arises in the joint activities of people. Conscious psychic reflection mediated by language and arbitrary. The structure of consciousness consists of: sensory tissue of consciousness, system of meanings and system of personal meanings(A.N. Leontyev). Consciousness provides the possibility of objective cognition and arbitrary transformation of the surrounding reality due to the fact that it constitutes the internal plan of human activity.

Psyche (from the Greek psychikos - spiritual) is a form of active reflection by the subject of objective reality, arising in the process of interaction of highly organized living beings with the outside world and carrying out a regulatory function in their behavior (activity). The central category in this definition is the active display or reflection of reality.

Mental reflection is not a mirror, mechanically passive copying of the world (like a mirror or a camera), it is associated with a search, a choice; in mental reflection, incoming information is subjected to specific processing, i.e. mental reflection is an active reflection of the world in connection with some necessity, with needs. This is a subjective, selective reflection of the objective world, since it always belongs to the subject, does not exist outside the subject and depends on subjective characteristics. You can define the psyche as a “subjective image of the objective world” - this is our idea or picture of the world, according to which we feel, make decisions and act.

The fundamental property of the psyche - subjectivity - determined introspection as the main method of its research from ancient times until the emergence of the first research centers at the end of the 19th century. Introspection is self-observation organized according to special rules.

In Russian psychology, a rationalistic way of cognition is generally adopted, based on logic and experience, which connects the psyche with the activity of the brain, the development of which is determined by the evolution of living nature. However, the psyche cannot be reduced simply to the nervous system. Mental properties are the result of neurophysiological activity of the brain, but contain the characteristics of external objects, not internal ones physiological processes, with the help of which the psychic arises. Signal transformations taking place in the brain are perceived by a person as events taking place outside of him - in external space and the world.

Mental phenomena are correlated not with a separate neurophysiological process, but with organized sets of such processes, i.e. psyche is a systemic quality of the brain, realized through multi-level functional systems brain, which are formed in a person in the process of life and his mastery of historically established forms of activity and experience of mankind through active activity. Thus, specifically human qualities (consciousness, speech, work, etc.) are formed in a person only during his lifetime, in the process of assimilating the culture created by previous generations. Consequently, the human psyche includes at least three components, as shown in Fig. 3.

Fig.3. The structure of the subject’s mental reflection of the external and internal world.

Functions of the psyche.

The definition and concept of the psyche, analyzed above, gives an idea of the functions of the psyche or answers the question - why does the subject need a psyche?

Even W. James, the founder of the functional approach in psychology (the forerunner of behaviorism - the science of behavior) believed that the psyche serves the purpose of adapting the individual to the surrounding world and therefore reflects it. Accordingly, the functions of the psyche include: 1) reflection, 2) adaptation necessary for survival and interaction with the environment - biological, physical, social. From the definition of the psyche it is clear that it also performs 3) a regulatory function, that is, it directs and regulates the activity of the subject and controls behavior. In order to regulate behavior adequately to the conditions of external and internal environment, that is, adaptively, it is necessary to navigate this environment. Consequently, it is logical to highlight 4) the orientation function of the psyche.

The mental functions mentioned above 5) ensure the integrity of the body, which is necessary not only for survival, but also for maintaining the physical and mental health of the subject.

Modern domestic psychologists are expanding the list of traditionally considered mental functions. Thus, V. Allakhverdov in his works pays great attention to 6) the cognitive or educational function of the psyche and considers the psyche as an ideal cognitive system. One of the famous Russian methodologists B. Lomov, based on a systems approach, identifies 7) the communicative function of the psyche, since the psyche of the subject arises and develops in interaction with others, that is, it is included as a component in other systems (an individual within a group, etc. ).

Ya. Ponomarev drew attention to the fact that human behavior can be non-adaptive (for example, creative behavior - where a person, when implementing his ideas, sometimes acts contrary to common sense and the instinct of self-preservation). Accordingly, he added 8) the function of creative activity, which leads a person to create a new reality that goes beyond the existing one.

It seems that this is an incomplete list of the functions of the psyche, that is, why and for what it is needed by an individual, personality and subject of activity. Psychological science is waiting for new discoveries in the study of mental phenomena.

To understand the essence of the diversity of mental phenomena, one of the basic and leading categories in Russian psychology is the category of “mental reflection”.

Category reflections is a fundamental philosophical concept, and it understands the universal property of matter, which consists in reproducing the signs, properties and relationships of the reflected object. This is a form of interaction of phenomena in which one of them is reflected, - while maintaining its qualitative certainty, creates in the second - reflective specific product: reflected. V.I. Lenin, at one time, developing “Diderot’s guess”, wrote: “It is logical to assume that all matter has a property, but essentially related to sensation, the property of reflection.” The ability to reflect, as well as the nature of its manifestation, depend on the level of organization of matter. Reflection appears in qualitatively different forms in inanimate nature, in the world of plants, animals and, finally, in humans.

In inanimate nature, the interaction of various material systems results in mutual reflection, which appears in the form of simple mechanical deformation, contraction or expansion depending on fluctuations in ambient temperature, light reflection, changes and reflection of electromagnetic, sound waves, chemical changes, physiological processes, etc. In other words, reflection in inanimate material nature reflects the action of the laws of mechanics, physics, and chemistry.

V.I. Lenin made a significant contribution to the doctrine of knowledge as a reflection of reality, therefore the dialectical-materialist theory of reflection is called the Leninist theory of reflection. The principle of reflection is often criticized: the theory of reflection supposedly limits a person to the framework of the existing (since it is impossible to reflect the future - that is, what does not yet exist); underestimates the creative activity of consciousness - therefore, it is proposed to replace the dialectical-materialist category of reflection with the concept of subjectivistically interpreted practice. In response to this, Lenin, emphasizing the creative activity of consciousness, noted: “Human consciousness not only reflects the objective world, but also creates it,” since only on the basis of an adequate reflection of the objective world is the creative activity of a person practically transforming the world possible.

A. N. Leontyev, speaking about reflection, noted that the historical meaning of this concept should first of all be emphasized. It consists, firstly, in the fact that its content is not frozen. On the contrary, with the progress of sciences about nature, man and society, it develops and becomes enriched.

The second, especially important, point is that the concept of “reflection” contains the idea of development, the idea of the existence of various levels and forms of reflection. This is about different levels those changes in reflecting bodies that arise as a result of the influences they experience and are adequate to them.

These levels are very different. But still these are levels of a single relationship, which is qualitatively different forms finds itself in inanimate Nature, and in the animal world, and, finally, in humans.

In this regard, a task arises that is of paramount importance for psychology: to study the features and function of various levels of reflection, to trace the transitions from its simpler levels and forms to more complex levels and forms.

The features of the levels and forms of mental reflection are quite well described in the psychological literature. Briefly, the essence of the general provisions boils down to the following provisions.

An essential property of a living organism is irritability- reflection of the influences of the external and internal environment in the form of excitation and selective response. Being a prepsychic form of reflection, it acts as a regulator of adaptive behavior.

The further stage in the development of reflection is associated with the emergence of a new property in higher species of living organisms - sensitivity in that is, the ability to have sensations, which are the initial form of the psyche.

The formation of sense organs and the mutual coordination of their actions led to the formation of the ability to reflect things in a certain set of their properties - the ability to perceive the surrounding reality in a certain integrity, in the form subjective image this reality. Animals not only differentially perceive the properties and relationships of things, but also reflect a significant number of biologically significant spatio-temporal and elementary causal connections in the surrounding world.

The Becoming of Man and human society in progress labor activity and communication through speech led to the emergence of a specifically human, social in its essence form of reflection in the form consciousness And self-awareness. What is characteristic of reflection, which is characteristic of man, is that it is a creative process that is social in nature. It involves not only influence on the subject from the outside, but also active action the subject himself, his creative activity, which manifests itself in selectivity and purposefulness of perception, in abstracting from some objects, properties and relationships and fixing others, in transforming feelings, images into logical thought, in operating with concepts. The creative activity of a cognitive person is also revealed in acts of productive imagination, fantasy, in search activities aimed at revealing the truth by forming a hypothesis and testing it, in creating a theory, and producing new ideas, plans, and goals.

Thus, mental phenomena in all the diversity of their manifestations act as various forms and levels of subjective reflection of objective reality, as images of objects and phenomena of the surrounding world, as the unity of real being and its reflection. S. L. Rubinstein noted that “the mental is experienced by the subject as a direct given, but is cognized only indirectly - through his relationship to the objective world.”

In the previous decades, as a result of numerous theoretical and empirical studies, fundamental and applied developments carried out by several generations of Soviet and Russian scientists on the basis of their constructive use of scientific traditions that have developed in domestic psychology, modern psychological science was formed, despite the presence in it of many original and original scientific schools, a common understanding of basic, key characteristics reflective nature of the psyche. These characteristics are:

psyche, considered as a special form of reflection inherent in higher animals, i.e., arising at a certain stage of development of the living world. Various shapes mental reflections act as a property (attribute) of organic matter (a living organism in general and the human brain in particular);
adequacy of mental phenomena to the surrounding reality;
psyche as a system of reflection, in which both the reflecting system itself and the carrier of reflection are fused together;
objectification of the content of reflection (transforming it into subjective reality and acquiring objective meaning for a living organism and semantic meaning for each individual person).

The activity of mental reflection is that:

the psyche doubles the surrounding world in a subjective image;
a living organism acts as a self-organizing, internally and externally active system in accordance with the level of development of its inherent forms of mental reflection;
psyche appears the most important factor biological evolution and cultural-historical man. The main factors determining the development of the human psyche are activity, communication and other forms in which activity is realized and manifested;
internal activity - a selective attitude towards the outside world.

Activity and selective attitude towards the outside world underlie mental reflection in the form of a subjective image of the surrounding world, and also perform the functions of regulating behavior and activity, which are manifested as follows:

the mental acts as a regulatory system that determines the functioning of the somatic and mental subsystems of a person;
the adaptive nature of mental reflection allows a living organism and a person to actively adapt to environment by changing functions individual organs, behavior and activities;
anticipation (anticipation) is one of important properties mental reflection, providing the opportunity not only to record the past and present, but also to anticipate in certain moments the result of the need for the future.

MENTAL REFLECTION

1. LEVELS OF REFLECTION STUDY

The concept of reflection is a fundamental philosophical concept. It also has a fundamental meaning for psychological science. The introduction of the concept of reflection into psychology as a starting point marked the beginning of its development on a new, Marxist-Leninist theoretical basis. Since then, psychology has gone through a half-century journey, during which its concrete scientific ideas have developed and changed; however, the main thing - the approach to the psyche as a subjective image of objective reality - remained and remains unshakable in it.

Speaking about reflection, we should first of all emphasize the historical meaning of this concept. It consists, firstly, in the fact that its content is not frozen. On the contrary, with the progress of sciences about nature, man and society, it develops and enriches itself.

The second, particularly important point is that the concept of reflection contains the idea of development, the idea of the existence of various levels and forms of reflection. We are talking about different levels of those changes in reflecting bodies that arise as a result of the influences they experience and are adequate to them. These levels are very different. But still, these are levels of a single relationship, which reveals itself in qualitatively different forms in inanimate nature, in the animal world, and, finally, in humans.

It is known that Lenin considered reflection as a property already inherent in the “foundation of the building of matter itself,” which at a certain stage of development, namely at the level of highly organized living matter, takes on the form of sensation, perception, and in humans - also the form of theoretical thought, concept . Such, in the broadest sense of the word, historical understanding of reflection excludes the possibility of interpreting psychological phenomena as removed from common system interaction of a world united in its materiality. Greatest meaning This for science is that the mental, the originality of which was postulated by idealism, turns into a problem scientific research; the only postulate remains the recognition of the existence of objective reality independent of the cognizing subject. This is the meaning of Lenin’s demand to go not from sensation to the external world, but from outside world to sensation, from the external world as primary to subjective mental phenomena as secondary. It goes without saying that this requirement fully applies to the concrete scientific study of the psyche, to psychology.

The path of exploration of sensory phenomena, coming from the external world, from things, is their path objective research. As evidenced by the experience of the development of psychology, many theoretical difficulties arise along this path. They were discovered already in connection with the first concrete achievements in the natural science study of the brain and sense organs. The work of physiologists and psychophysicists, although they have enriched scientific psychology with knowledge important facts and patterns that determine the emergence of mental phenomena, but they could not directly reveal the essence of these phenomena themselves; the psyche continued to be considered in its isolation, and the problem of the relationship of the psyche to the external world was solved in the spirit of the physiological idealism of J. Müller, the hieroglyphism of G. Helmholtz, the dualistic idealism of W. Wundt, etc. Parallelistic positions, which in modern psychology are only disguised, became most widespread new terminology.

A great contribution to the problem of reflection was made by the reflex theory and the teaching of I. P. Pavlov on higher nervous activity. The main emphasis in the study has shifted significantly: reflective, mental function brain acted as a product and condition of real connections between the organism and the environment influencing it. This suggested a fundamentally new orientation of research, expressed in an approach to brain phenomena from the side of the interaction that generates them, which is realized in the behavior of organisms, its preparation, formation and consolidation. It even seemed that the study of the work of the brain at the level of this, in the words of I. P. Pavlov, “the second part of physiology” in the future will completely merge with scientific, explanatory psychology.

There remained, however, the main theoretical difficulty, which is expressed in the impossibility of reducing the level of psychological analysis to the level of physiological analysis, psychological laws to the laws of brain activity. Now that psychology as a special field of knowledge has become widespread and has acquired practical distribution and acquired practical significance for solving many problems put forward by life, the position about the irreducibility of the mental to the physiological has received new evidence - in the very practice of psychological research. There is a fairly clear factual distinction mental processes, on the one hand, and the physiological mechanisms that implement these processes - on the other, discrimination, without which, of course, it is impossible to solve the problems of correlation and connection between them; At the same time, a system of objective psychological methods, in particular methods of borderline, psychological and physiological research. Thanks to this, the specific study of the nature and mechanisms of mental processes has gone far beyond the limits limited by natural scientific ideas about the activity of the mental organ - the brain. Of course, this does not mean at all that all theoretical questions related to the problem of psychological and physiological have found their solution. We can only say that there has been serious progress in this direction. At the same time, new challenges arose theoretical problems. One of them was posed by the development of a cybernetic approach to the study of reflection processes. Under the influence of cybernetics, the focus was on the analysis of regulation of the states of living systems through the information that controls them. This was a new step along the already outlined path of studying the interaction of living organisms with the environment, which now appeared from a new side - from the side of transmission, processing and storage of information. At the same time, there has been a theoretical convergence of approaches to qualitatively different controlled and self-governing objects - inanimate systems, animals and humans. The very concept of information (one of the fundamental ones for cybernetics), although it came from communication technology, is, so to speak, of human, physiological and even psychological origin: after all, it all began with the study of the transmission of semantic information from person to person through technical channels.

As is known, the cybernetic approach from the very beginning implicitly extended to mental activity. Very soon, its necessity emerged in psychology itself, especially clearly in engineering psychology, which studies the “man-machine” system, which is considered as a special case of control systems. Now concepts such as “feedback”, “regulation”, “information”, “model”, etc. have become widely used in such branches of psychology that are not associated with the need to use formal languages capable of describing control processes occurring in any systems, including technical ones.

If the introduction of neurophysiological concepts into psychology was based on the concept of the psyche as a function of the brain, then the spread of the cybernetic approach in it has a different scientific justification. After all, psychology is a specific science about the emergence and development of a person’s reflection of reality, which occurs in his activity and which, mediating it, plays a real role in it. For its part, cybernetics, studying the processes of intrasystem and intersystem interactions in the concepts of information and similarity, allows us to introduce quantitative methods into the study of reflection processes and thereby enriches the doctrine of reflection as a general property of matter. This has been repeatedly pointed out in our philosophical literature, as well as the fact that the results of cybernetics are of significant importance for psychological research.

The significance of cybernetics, taken from this side, for the study of the mechanisms of sensory reflection seems indisputable. We must not forget, however, that general cybernetics, while providing descriptions of regulatory processes, is abstracted from their specific nature. Therefore, in relation to each special area, the question arises about its adequate application. It is known, for example, how complex this issue is when it comes to social processes. It is also difficult for psychology. After all, the cybernetic approach in psychology, of course, does not consist in simply replacing psychological terms with cybernetic ones; such a replacement is as fruitless as the attempt made at one time to replace psychological terms with physiological ones. It is even less permissible to mechanically include individual provisions and theorems of cybernetics into psychology.

Among the problems that arise in psychology in connection with the development of the cybernetic approach, the problem of the sensory image and model is of particularly important specific scientific and methodological significance. Despite the fact that many works by philosophers, physiologists, psychologists and cyberneticists are devoted to this problem, it deserves further theoretical analysis - in the light of the doctrine of the sensory image as a subjective reflection of the world in the human mind.

As is known, the concept of a model has become very widespread and is used in very different meanings. However, for further consideration of our problem, we can accept the simplest and roughest, so to speak, definition of it. We will call a model a system (set) whose elements are in a relationship of similarity (homomorphism, isomorphism) to the elements of some other (modeled) system. It is quite obvious that such a broad definition of a model includes, in particular, a sensual image. The problem, however, is not whether it is possible to approach the mental image as a model, but whether this approach captures its essential, specific features, its nature.

Lenin's theory of reflection considers sensory images in the human mind as imprints, snapshots of an independently existing reality. This is what brings mental reflection closer to its “related” forms of reflection, which are also characteristic of matter, which does not have a “clearly expressed ability of sensation.” But this forms only one side of the characteristic of mental reflection; the other side is that psychic reflection, unlike mirror and other forms of passive reflection, is subjective, which means that it is not passive, not deathly, but active, that its definition includes human life, practice and that it is characterized by the movement of constant transfusion of the objective into the subjective.

These provisions, which have primarily an epistemological meaning, are at the same time the starting point for concrete scientific psychological research. Exactly on psychological level a problem arises specific features those forms of reflection that are expressed in the presence of subjective – sensory and mental – images of reality in a person.

The position that the mental reflection of reality is its subjective image means that the image belongs to a real subject of life. But the concept of subjectivity of an image in the sense of its belonging to the subject of life includes an indication of its activity. The connection between an image and what is reflected is not a connection between two objects (systems, sets) standing in a mutually identical relationship to each other - their relationship reproduces the polarization of any life process, at one pole of which stands the active (“biased”) subject, at the other - an object “indifferent” to the subject. It is this feature of the relationship of the subjective image to the reflected reality that is not captured by the “model-modeled” relationship. The latter has the property of symmetry, and accordingly the terms “model” and “modeled” have a relative meaning, depending on which of the two objects the subject cognizing them considers (theoretically or practically) to be a model, and which one to be modeled. As for the modeling process (i.e., the subject’s construction of models of any type, or even the subject’s cognition of the connections that determine such a change in an object that imparts to it the characteristics of a model of a certain object), this is a completely different question.

So, the concept of the subjectivity of the image includes the concept of the subject’s partiality. Psychology has long described and studied the dependence of perception, representation, thinking on “what a person needs” - on his needs, motives, attitudes, emotions. It is very important to emphasize that such partiality is itself objectively determined and is not expressed in the inadequacy of the image (although it can be expressed in it), but in the fact that it allows one to actively penetrate into reality. In other words, subjectivity at the level of sensory reflection should be understood not as its subjectivism, but rather as its “subjectivity,” i.e., its belonging to an active subject.

A mental image is a product of the subject’s vital, practical connections and relationships with the objective world, which are incomparably broader and richer than any model relationship. Therefore, its description as reproducing in the language of sensory modalities (in a sensory “code”) the parameters of an object affecting the subject’s sense organs is the result of analysis at a physical, essentially level. But it is precisely at this level that the sensory image reveals itself to be poorer in comparison with a possible mathematical or physical model of the object. The situation is different when we consider the image on a psychological level - as a mental reflection. In this capacity, on the contrary, it appears in all its richness, as having absorbed into itself that system of objective relations in which only the content it reflects actually exists. Moreover, what has been said applies to a conscious sensory image - to an image at the level of conscious reflection of the world.

2. MENTAL REFLECTION ACTIVITY

In psychology, there have been two approaches, two views on the process of generating a sensory image. One of them reproduces the old sensationalist concept of perception, according to which the image is the direct result of the unilateral influence of the object on the senses.

A fundamentally different understanding of the process of generating an image goes back to Descartes. Comparing vision in his famous “Dioptrics” with the perception of objects by the blind, who “see as if with their hands,” Descartes wrote: “...If you consider that the difference seen by a blind man between trees, stones, water and other similar objects with the help of his stick, does not seem to him less than that which exists between red, yellow, green and any other color, then nevertheless the dissimilarity between bodies is nothing more than different ways of moving a stick or resisting its movements.” Subsequently, the idea of the fundamental commonality of the generation of tactile and visual images was developed, as is known, by Diderot and especially Sechenov.

In modern psychology, the position that perception is an active process that necessarily includes efferent links has received general recognition. Although identifying and recording efferent processes sometimes presents significant methodological difficulties, so that some phenomena seem to indicate rather in favor of the passive, “screen” theory of perception, their mandatory participation can still be considered established.

Particularly important data were obtained in ontogenetic studies of perception. These studies have the advantage that they make it possible to study the active processes of perception in their, so to speak, expanded, open, i.e., external motor, not yet interiorized and not reduced forms. The data obtained in them are well known, and I will not present them, I will only note that it was in these studies that the concept of perceptual action was introduced.

The role of efferent processes was also studied in the study auditory perception, the receptor organ of which, in contrast to the touching hand and the visual apparatus, is completely devoid of external activity. For speech hearing, the need for “articulatory imitation” was experimentally demonstrated, and for pitch hearing, the need for hidden activity of the vocal apparatus.

Now the position that for the appearance of an image, the unilateral influence of a thing on the subject’s sense organs is not enough and that for this it is also necessary that there be a “counter” process active on the part of the subject, has become almost banal. Naturally, the main direction in the study of perception has become the study of active perceptual processes, their genesis and structure. Despite all the differences in the specific hypotheses with which researchers approach the study of perceptual activity, they are united by the recognition of its necessity, the conviction that it is in it that the process of “translation” of external objects affecting the sense organs into a mental image is carried out. This means that it is not the senses that perceive, but a person using the senses. Every psychologist knows that a grid image (grid “model”) of an object is not the same as its visible (mental) image, as well as, for example, that the so-called sequential images can only be called images conditionally, because they lack constancy, follow the movement of the gaze and are subject to Emmert's law.

No, of course, it is necessary to stipulate the fact that the processes of perception are included in the vital, practical connections of a person with the world, with material objects, and therefore necessarily obey - directly or indirectly - the properties of the objects themselves. This determines the adequacy of the subjective product of perception – the mental image. Whatever form the perceptual activity takes, no matter what degree of reduction or automation it undergoes during its formation and development, it is fundamentally structured in the same way as the activity of the touching hand, “removing” the outline of an object. Like the activity of the touching hand, any perceptual activity finds an object where it really exists - in the external world, in objective space and time. The latter constitutes that most important psychological feature of the subjective image, which is called its objectivity or, very unfortunately, its objectification.

This feature of the sensory mental image in its simplest and most explicit form appears in relation to extraceptive object images. The fundamental psychological fact is that in the image we are given not our subjective states, but the objects themselves. For example, the light impact of a thing on the eye is perceived precisely as a thing that is outside the eye. In the act of perception, the subject does not correlate his image of a thing with the thing itself. For the subject, the image is, as it were, superimposed on the thing. This psychologically expresses the immediacy of the connection between sensations, sensory consciousness and the external world, emphasized by Lenin.

When copying an object in a drawing, we must correlate the image (model) of the object with the depicted (modeled) object, perceiving them as two different things; but we do not establish such a relationship between our subjective image of an object and the object itself, between the perception of our drawing and the drawing itself. If the problem of such a relationship arises, it is only secondary – from the reflection of the experience of perception.

It is therefore impossible to agree with the statement sometimes expressed that the objectivity of perception is the result of the “objectification” of a mental image, that is, that the influence of a thing first gives rise to its sensory image, and then this image is related by the subject to the world “projected onto the original.” Psychologically, such a special act of “reverse projection” into normal conditions simply doesn't exist. The eye, under the influence of a light point unexpectedly appearing on the screen on the periphery of its retina, immediately moves to it, and the subject immediately sees this point localized in objective space; what he does not perceive at all is his displacement at the moment of the eye jump in relation to the retina and changes in the neurodynamic states of his receptive system. In other words, for the subject there is no structure that could be secondarily correlated with an external object, just as he can correlate, for example, his drawing with the original.

The fact that the objectivity (“objectivity”) of sensations and perceptions is not something secondary is evidenced by many remarkable facts long known in psychology. One of them is related to the so-called "probe problem". This fact is that for a surgeon probing a wound, the “sensing” end is the end of the probe with which he gropes for the bullet - that is, his sensations turn out to be paradoxically displaced into the world of external things and are not localized at the “probe-hand” boundary, and at the boundary “probe-perceived object” (bullet). The same thing happens in any other similar case, for example, when we perceive the roughness of paper with the tip of a sharp pen. we feel the road in the dark with a stick, etc.

The main interest of these facts is that they “divorce” and partly exteriorize relationships that are usually hidden from the researcher. One of them is the “hand-probe” relationship. The influence exerted by the probe on the receptive apparatus of the hand causes sensations that are integrated into its complex visual-tactile image and subsequently play a leading role in regulating the process of holding the probe in the hand. Another relationship is the probe-object relationship. It occurs as soon as the surgeon's action brings the probe into contact with the object. But even in this first moment, the object, still appearing in its uncertainty - as “something”, as the first point on the line of the future “drawing” - image - is related to the external world, localized in objective space. In other words, a sensory mental image exhibits the property of object-relatedness already at the moment of its formation. But let’s continue the analysis of the “probe-object” relationship a little further. Localization of an object in space expresses its distance from the subject; this is the charm of the boundaries of its independent existence from the subject. These boundaries are revealed as soon as the activity of the subject is forced to submit to the object, and this happens even in the case when the activity leads to its remodeling or destruction. A remarkable feature of the relationship under consideration is that this the border passes as the border between two physical bodies: one of them - the tip of the probe - implements the cognitive, perceptual activity of the subject, the other constitutes the object of this activity. On the border of these two material things, sensations are localized, forming the “fabric” of the subjective image of the object: they act as shifted to the touching end of the probe - an artificial distance receptor, which forms an extension of the arm of the acting subject.

If in the described conditions of perception the conductor of the subject’s action is a material object that is set in motion, then with distant perception itself the process of spatial localization of the object is rearranged and becomes extremely complicated. In the case of perception through a probe, the hand does not move significantly in relation to the probe, but in visual perception, the eye is mobile, “sorting through” the light rays that reach its retina and are cast by the object. But even in this case, in order for a subjective image to arise, it is necessary to comply with the conditions that move the “subject-object” boundary to the surface of the object itself. These are the very conditions that create the so-called invariance of a visual object, namely, the presence of such displacements of the retina relative to the reflected light flux that create, as it were, a continuous “change of feelers” controlled by the subject, which is the equivalent of their movement along the surface of the object. Now the subject's sensations also shift to external boundaries object, but not by thing (probe), but by light rays; the subject sees not a retinal, continuously and rapidly changing projection of an object, but an external object in its relative invariance and stability.

It was precisely the ignorance of the main feature of the sensory image - the relation of our sensations to the external world - that created the largest misunderstanding that prepared the ground for subjectively idealistic conclusions from the principle of the specific energy of the sense organs. This misunderstanding lies in the fact that the subjectively experienced reactions of the sensory organs, caused by the actions of stimuli, were identified by I. Muller with sensations included in the image of the external world. In reality, of course, no one mistakes the glow resulting from electrical irritation of the eye for real light, and only Munchausen could have come up with the idea of igniting gunpowder on the shelf of a gun with sparks falling from the eyes. Usually we quite correctly say: “it’s dark in the eyes”, “it’s ringing in the ears” - in the eyes and ears, and not in the room, on the street, etc. In defense of the secondary nature of the attribution of the subjective image, one could refer to Zenden, Hebb and other authors describing cases of restoration of vision in adults after removal of congenital cataracts: at first they experience only a chaos of subjective visual phenomena, which then correlate with objects of the external world and become their images. But these are people with already formed objective perception in another modality, who now receive only a new contribution from vision; Therefore, strictly speaking, what we have here is not a secondary reference of the image to the external world, but the inclusion of elements of a new modality in the image of the external world.

Of course, distant perception (visual, auditory) is a process of extreme complexity, and its study encounters many facts that seem contradictory and sometimes inexplicable. But psychology, like any science, cannot be built only as a sum of empirical facts; it cannot avoid theory, and the whole question is what theory it is guided by.

In the light of the theory of reflection, the school “classical” scheme: a candle -> its projection on the retina -> the image of this projection in the brain, emitting some kind of “metaphysical light” - is nothing more than a superficial, grossly one-sided (and therefore incorrect) image mental reflection. This scheme directly leads to the recognition that our senses, possessing “specific energies” (which is a fact), fence off the subjective image from external objective reality. It is clear that no description of this scheme of the perception process in terms of the spread of nervous excitation, information, construction of models, etc. is able to change it in essence.

The other side of the problem of a sensory subjective image is the question of the role of practice in its formation. It is well known that the introduction of the category of practice into the theory of knowledge constitutes the main point of the divide between the Marxist understanding of knowledge and the understanding of knowledge in pre-Marxian materialism, on the one hand, and in idealist philosophy, on the other. “The point of view of life, of practice, must be the first and main point of view of the theory of knowledge,” says Lenin. As the first and main point of view, this point of view is also preserved in the psychology of sensory cognitive processes.

It was already said above that perception is active, that the subjective image of the external world is a product of the subject’s activity in this world. But this activity cannot be understood otherwise than as realizing the life of a bodily subject, which is, first of all, a practical process. Of course, it would be a serious mistake to consider in psychology any perceptual activity of an individual as occurring directly in the form practical activities or directly derived from it. The processes of active visual or auditory perception are separated from direct practice, so that human eye and the human ear become, as Marx put it, theoretical organs. The only sense of touch supports direct practical contacts of the individual with the external material-objective world. This is an extremely important circumstance from the point of view of the problem under consideration, but it does not exhaust it completely. The fact is that the basis of cognitive processes is not the individual practice of the subject, but the “totality of human practice.” Therefore, not only the thinking, but also the perception of a person greatly exceeds in its richness the relative poverty of his personal experience.

Correctly posing in psychology the question of the role of practice as the basis and criterion of truth requires investigating exactly how practice enters into human perceptual activity. It must be said that psychology has already accumulated a lot of concrete scientific data that closely leads to the solution of this issue.

As already mentioned, psychological research is making it more and more obvious to us that the decisive role in the processes of perception belongs to their efferent links. In some cases, namely, when these links have their expression in motor skills or micromotor skills, they appear quite clearly; in other cases they are “hidden”, expressed in the dynamics of the current internal states of the receiving system. But they always exist. Their function is “assimilative” not only in a narrower sense, but also in a broader sense. The latter also covers the function of including the total experience of objective human activity in the process of generating an image. The fact is that such inclusion cannot be achieved as a result of simple repetition of combinations of sensory elements and actualization of temporary connections between them. After all, we are not talking about the associative reproduction of the missing elements of sensory complexes, but about the adequacy of the emerging subjective images general properties the real world in which a person lives and acts. In other words, we are talking about the subordination of the process of generating an image to the principle of verisimilitude.

To illustrate this principle, let us again turn to well-known psychological facts for a long time - to the effects of “pseudoscopic” visual perception, which we have now begun to study again. As is known, the pseudoscopic effect is that when viewing objects through binoculars composed of two Dove prisms, a natural distortion of perception occurs: closer points of objects seem more distant and vice versa. As a result, for example, a concave plaster mask of a face is seen under certain lighting as a convex, relief image of it, and a relief image of a face is seen, on the contrary, as a mask. But the main interest of experiments with a pseudoscope is that a visible pseudoscopic image appears only if it is believable (a plaster mask of a face is as “plausible” from the point of view of reality as its plaster convex sculptural image), or in the case if in one way or another it is possible to block the inclusion of a visible pseudoscopic image in a person’s existing picture of the real world.

It is known that if you replace a human head made of plaster with the head of a real person, then the pseudoscopic effect does not arise at all. Particularly demonstrative are the experiments in which the subject, armed with a pseudoscope, is shown simultaneously two objects in the same visual field - both a real head and its convex plaster image; then the person’s head is seen as usual, and the plaster is perceived pseudoscopically, that is, like a concave mask. Such phenomena are observed, however, only if the pseudoscopic image is plausible. Another feature of the pseudoscopic effect is that in order for it to occur, it is better to demonstrate the object against an abstract, non-objective background, i.e., outside the system of concrete-objective connections. Finally, the same principle of verisimilitude is expressed in the absolutely amazing effect of the appearance of such “additions” to a visible pseudoscopic image that make its existence objectively possible. Thus, placing a screen with holes in front of a certain surface through which parts of this surface can be seen, we should obtain the following picture with pseudoscopic perception: parts of the surface that are located behind the screen, visible through its holes, should be perceived by the subject as being closer to him than screen, i.e., hanging freely in front of the screen. In reality, the situation is different. Under favorable conditions, the subject sees - as it should be with pseudoscopic perception - parts of the surface located behind the screen, in front of the screen; they, however, do not “hang” in the air (which is implausible), but are perceived as some volumetric physical bodies protruding through the opening of the screen. In the visible image, an increase appears in the form of lateral surfaces that form the boundaries of these physical bodies. And finally, the last thing: as systematic experiments have shown, the processes of the emergence of a pseudoscopic image, as well as the elimination of its pseudoscopicity, although they occur simultaneously, are by no means automatic, not by themselves. They are the result of perceptual operations carried out by the subject. The latter is proven by the fact that subjects can learn to control both of these processes.

The point of experiments with a pseudoscope, of course, is not at all that by creating a distortion of the projection of demonstrated objects on the retina of the eyes using special optics, it is possible, under certain conditions, to obtain a false subjective visual image. Their real meaning consists (as well as the similar classical “chronic” experiments of Stratton, I. Kohler and others) in the opportunity they open to explore the process of such a transformation of information arriving at the sensory “input”, which is subject to the general properties, connections, patterns of real reality. This is another, more complete expression of the objectivity of the subjective image, which now appears not only in its original relation to the reflected object, but also in its relation to the objective world as a whole.

It goes without saying that a person should already have a picture of this world. It develops, however, not only at the immediate sensory level, but also at higher cognitive levels - as a result of an individual’s mastery of the experience of social practice, reflected in linguistic form, in a system of meanings. In other words, the “operator” of perception is not simply previously accumulated associations of sensations and not apperception in the Kantian sense, but social practice.

The former, metaphysically thinking psychology invariably moved when analyzing perception on the plane of double abstraction: the abstraction of a person from society and the abstraction of the perceived object from its connections with objective reality. The subjective sensory image and its object appeared for her as two things opposing each other. But a mental image is not a thing. Contrary to physicalist ideas, it does not exist in the substance of the brain in the form of a thing, just as there is no “observer” of this thing, which can only be the soul, only the spiritual “I”. The truth is that valid and active person with the help of his brain and its organs perceives external objects; their appearance to him is their sensory image. Let us emphasize once again: the phenomenon of objects, and not the physiological states caused by them.

In perception, there is constantly an active process of “extracting” from reality its properties, relationships, etc., their fixation in short-term or long-term states of receiving systems and the reproduction of these properties in acts of formation of new images, in acts of formation of new images, in acts of recognition and object recall.

Here we must again interrupt the presentation with a description of a psychological fact illustrating what has just been said. Everyone knows what guessing mysterious pictures is. You need to find in the picture a hidden image of the object indicated in the riddle (for example, “where is the hunter,” etc.). A trivial explanation of the process of perception (recognition) of a desired object in a picture is that it occurs as a result of successive comparisons of the visual image of a given object, which the subject has, with individual complexes of elements of the picture; the coincidence of this image with one of the complexes of the picture leads to its “guessing”. In other words, this explanation comes from the idea of two things being compared: the image in the subject’s head and his image in the picture. As for the difficulties that arise in this case, they are due to the lack of emphasis and completeness of the image of the desired object in the picture, which requires repeated “trying on” of the image to it. The psychological implausibility of such an explanation suggested to the author the idea of a simple experiment, which consisted in the fact that the subject was not given any indication of the object disguised in the picture. The subject was told: “before you are the usual mysterious pictures for children: try to find the object that is hidden in each of them.” Under these conditions, the process could not proceed at all according to the scheme of comparing the image of the object that arose in the subject with its image contained in the elements of the picture. Nevertheless, the subjects solved the mysterious pictures. They “scooped” the image of the object from the picture, and their image of this familiar object was updated.

We have now come to a new aspect of the problem of the sensory image - the problem of representation. In psychology, a representation is usually called a generalized image that is “recorded” in memory. The old, substantial understanding of the image as a certain thing led to the same substantial understanding of representation. This is a generalization that arises as a result of superimposing on each other - in the manner of Galton's photography - sensory imprints, to which a word-name is associatively attached. Although within the limits of such an understanding the possibility of transformation of ideas was allowed, they were still thought of as certain “ready-made” formations stored in the warehouses of our memory. It is easy to see that such an understanding of representations is in good agreement with the formal-logical doctrine of concrete concepts, but is in blatant contradiction with the dialectical-materialist understanding of generalizations.

Our sensory generalized images, like concepts, contain movement and, therefore, contradictions; they reflect the object in its diverse connections and mediations. This means that no sensory knowledge is a frozen imprint. Although it is stored in a person’s head, it is not as “ready-made”, but only virtually – in the form of formed physiological brain constellations that are capable of realizing the subjective image of an object that is revealed to a person in one or another system of objective connections. The idea of an object includes not only what is similar in objects, but also different, as it were, facets of it, including those that do not “overlap” each other, and are not in a relationship of structural or functional similarity.

Not only concepts are dialectical, but also our sensory representations; therefore, they are capable of performing a function that cannot be reduced to the role of fixed reference models, correlating with the influences received by the receptors from individual objects. As a mental image, they exist inseparably from the activity of the subject, which they saturate with the wealth accumulated in them, making it alive and creative. *** *

*The problem of sensory images and ideas arose before psychology from the very first steps of its development. The question of the nature of our sensations and perceptions could not be ignored by any psychological direction, no matter what philosophical basis it came from. It is not surprising, therefore, that a huge number of works – theoretical and experimental – have been devoted to this problem. Their numbers continue to grow rapidly today. As a result, a number of individual questions turned out to be developed in extremely detail and almost unlimited factual material was collected. Despite this, modern psychology is still far from being able to create a holistic, non-eclectic concept of perception, covering its various levels and mechanisms. This especially applies to the level of conscious perception.

New prospects in this regard are opened by the introduction into psychology of the category of mental reflection, the scientific productivity of which now no longer requires proof. This category, however, cannot be taken outside of its internal connection with other basic Marxist categories. Therefore, introducing the category of reflection into scientific psychology necessarily requires a restructuring of its entire categorical structure. The immediate problems that arise on this path are problems of activity, the problem of the psychology of consciousness, the psychology of personality. The following presentation is devoted to their theoretical analysis.

From the book Psychology author

Chapter 13. MENTAL STATE § 13.1. THE CONCEPT OF “STATE” IN THE NATURAL AND HUMANITIES The problem of state and the term “state” itself have long occupied the minds of representatives of philosophy and natural sciences. For the first time, the question of the concept of “state” was raised by Aristotle,

From the book Psychology author Krylov Albert Alexandrovich

Chapter 32. MENTAL HEALTH § 32.1. CRITERIA FOR MENTAL HEALTHThe vital activity of a person as a complex living system is ensured at different, but interconnected levels of functioning. In the most general approximation, we can distinguish three quite

From the book Entertaining physics of relationships author Gagin Timur Vladimirovich

Chapter 3 Reflection and refraction of light Determining needs and finding a complementary pair In the nineties of the last century, an interesting device was sold under the loud name “X-ray machine”. I remember how puzzled I was when, as a schoolboy, I first took

From the book Teenager [The Difficulties of Growing Up] author Kazan Valentina

Chapter 4 Parents and Teens: Mutual Reflection

From the book Parenting Smartly. 12 Revolutionary Strategies for Developing Your Child's Whole Brain author Siegel Daniel J.

Mirror Neurons: Psychic Reflection Have you ever started to feel thirsty while watching someone drink? Or did you yawn with others? These familiar responses can be understood in light of one of the most surprising recent discoveries in neurophysiology—mirror mirroring.

From the book The Art of Psychological Counseling [How to Give and Gain Mental Health] by May Rollo R

Chapter 10. Religion and Mental Health

From the book How to Develop the Ability to Hypnotize and Persuade Anyone by Smith Sven

Chapter 13. Reflecting psychic attacks None of us exists alone, in some kind of vacuum, where he alone is the active element, and everyone else remains neutral. We interact with people, which means not only do we influence others, but others also influence

From the book The Psyche of Stalin: A Psychoanalytic Study author Rancourt-Laferriere Daniel

From the book Master the Power of Suggestion! Achieve everything you want! by Smith Sven

Chapter 15 Reflecting attacks from psychological aggressors None of us exists alone, in some kind of vacuum, where he alone is the actor, and everyone else remains neutral. We interact with people, which means: not only do we influence others, but others also

From the book The Mysticism of Sound author Khan Hazrat Inayat

Chapter 12 THE MENTAL INFLUENCE OF MUSIC There is a vast field of research in the field of music, and its psychic influence seems to be very little known. modern science. We have been taught that the influence of music, or sound and vibration, comes to us and affects our senses

From the book Picture of the World as Viewed by Intelligence Services from Mysticism to Understanding author Ratnikov Boris Konstantinovich

author Tevosyan Mikhail

From the book Understanding Processes author Tevosyan Mikhail

From the book Healthy Society author Fromm Erich Seligmann

Chapter II psychic reflection. General idea of ​​the psyche. Mental Reflection Main Characteristics of Mental Reflection

Chapter II psychic reflection. General idea of the psyche. Mental Reflection Main Characteristics of Mental Reflection