The paradox of group mind: “People in a group” have more mind than “a group of people”.

2017 ◽  
Vol 146 (5) ◽  
pp. 691-699 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erin Cooley ◽  
B. Keith Payne ◽  
William Cipolli ◽  
C. Daryl Cameron ◽  
Alyssa Berger ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Group Mind

Getting Active Mindfully: Rationale and Case Illustration of a Group Mind-body and Activity Program for Chronic Pain

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan Greenberg ◽  
Ann Lin ◽  
Paula J. Popok ◽  
Ronald J. Kulich ◽  
Robert R. Edwards ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Pain ◽  
Case Illustration ◽  
Activity Program ◽  
Group Mind

scholarly journals Csoporttudat

2008 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 46
Author(s):  
William McDougall
Keyword(s):  
Group Mind

A pszichológus William McDougall 1920-ban megjelent The Group Mind című könyvének a szociológus Robert Maciverrel polemizáló oldalait a szerkesztőség tudománytörténeti érdekességként közli újra. A csoporttudat mibenlétének kérdése ugyanis az internet révén összekapcsolt lassan másfél milliárd ember és egyes csoportjaik összehangolt tevékenysége révén újult erővel vetődik fel, és érdekes ellenpontot képez a legfrissebb diskurzusokkal. A szöveghez Z. Karvalics László írt bevezetőt (McDougall kontra Maciver: ember, csoport és tudat).

Some Aspects of Sociology and their Psychiatrical Application

1923 ◽  
Vol 69 (286) ◽  
pp. 314-322
Author(s):  
Ian D. Suttie
Keyword(s):  
First Principles ◽  
Theoretical Discussion ◽  
Physiological Basis ◽  
The Social ◽  
Group Mind ◽  
Transcendent Reality ◽  
Figure Of Speech ◽  
Social Mind ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Clear Idea

We cannot avoid this difficult and theoretical discussion of first principles. The distinction between social and individual phenomena must be defined and shown as real, relative, abstract, etc., as the case may be. We cannot, for example, understand the inter-relations of the group and the unit unless we can form a clear idea of their respective natures. Even the literature of social psychology is not helpful or intelligible to us until the meaning and validity of such conceptions as group mind are definitely established. Hugo Munsterburg, for example, writes: “We compare the social mind with the individual mind. Such a comparison is not meant as a metaphor. It is a true, far-reaching analogy, an account of really corresponding processes.” He then works out the most elaborate parallel, even in regard to “physiological basis.” But parallels never meet, and though this one may be suggestive, it is not helpful to the understanding of the interaction of the social and individual minds—i. e. the psychogenesis of the group and the socialisation of the individual or even in forming clear ideas of these two and their relations. Other writers use group mind as a mere figure of speech, for others again it is a transcendent reality.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document