jim.shamlin.com

3. Means and Ends

Experimental psychology attempts to be in the nature of science, but applied psychology is more in the nature of technology - which seeks to apply the principles of science to the furtherance of human purposes. It is based on the assumption that people wish to accomplish specific ends, and attempts to prescribe an effective means by which the ends may be achieved.

There is a common error in the perception of technology - as technology suggests that a given means may achieve a desired end. It does not state that those are the only means by which the end can be achieved. Neither does it state that the ends will certainly be achieved by those means under any circumstances. In essence, it indicates a likelihood of an outcome, given certain actions under certain conditions. Technology and science itself states that given specific conditions, a principle can be expected to hold true.

Neither are science and technology particularly connected to the matter of ethics - they explore possibility, rather than propriety. Science discovers the explosive nature of chemicals, technology considers how this force may be applied and directed by means of various devices, but it is ultimately up to the man who uses these devices to determine how they are employed in achieving the ends he desires - and ethics lie entirely in that determination.

This is particularly of concern with a science such as psychology that is applied in a direct manner to influence human behavior. Science discovers the connection between a stimulus and a reflex action, technology determines how the stimulus can be applied to evoke the reaction, but the user of technology determines when and if it is appropriate to do so.

Or in more concrete terms: psychology tells us the ways in the human mind can be deceived, technology defines a practice by which deception can be effected, but it is the individual who leverages this knowledge to deceive others that bears the burden of the ethics of his decision to do so.

The matter becomes more delicate in the sphere of economics as property and liberty are at stake - and some will seize upon any means necessary to take those things from others. In that sense, psychology identifies many opportunities for exploitation - but whether it is used to avoid or implement exploitation remains in the hands of those who use it.

The scientist and technologist must separate themselves from such concerns to continue to discover the means and their method of employment - leaving to the ethicist the proper instruction of mankind in choosing to employ them. And it may be noted with some irony that those who propose to teach ethics also exploit psychology in ways that are not always beneficial.

Munsterberg speaks of the "sociologist," by which he seems to mean the political economist - as he describes such a person as presuming to make decisions for the market, such as the price at which others should buy and sell goods, and whether a good should be permitted to be produced or traded at all. His ostensible end is the welfare of society, and psychology the means by which he may seek to achieve it - as all actions in the market are human actions, driven by human motivation.

In terms of commercial activity, the author defines two methods by which it may be applied:

  1. We can begin with knowledge of various mental processes and consider how those processes can be applied to achieve given ends
  2. We can begin with the desired ends and consider which mental processes are required for their achievement.

This may seem a bit tedious, but this difference can be significant when psychology is put into action - much as a producer may determine his product based on his resources instead of defining a product and then seeking to obtain the resources to produce it.

In economic terms, the second method is to be preferred: man seeks to achieve or obtain something and must then gather the means. His needs are more likely to be satisfied in this manner, as are the needs of those who will purchase his product - though it is curious to witness how often the other approach is employed, often to unfortunate consequences.

The author also defines three "chief purposes of business activity":

  1. How to find the men whose mental qualities make them the best fitted for work
  2. The conditions under which those men can be the most productive (in terms of quality and quantity of their output)
  3. How those men may be motivated to strive to the best possible effect.

(EN: This is rather limited to one aspect of business: cooperation in productive activity in which men are employed to do the bidding of another. This is likely the reason the book's title mentions "industrial efficiency" rather than "commercial efficiency" or "business activity" in general.)

Hence, the major sections of this book focus on those three things: the best possible men, the best possible work, and the best possible effect.