Gustave Le Bon’s seminal work on crowd behavior Psychologie des foules (1895) has often been criticized for its lack of scientific rigor. In this paper, I argue that a closer examination of Le Bon’s earlier work on biology, and especially of his studies on the psychiatry of the spinal cord, as well as of his later work on pedagogy, can help to better frame the theme of crowd intelligence as it is posed in the 1895 text. In particular, I argue that the description of crowds as “automatic” and “unconscious” in no way implies, from Le Bon’s evolutionist perspective, a devaluation of the cognitive efficacy of their intelligence. Moreover, building on the antinomy coined in the 1990s by Marcel Gauchet, I suggest that Le Bon’s conception of the unconscious is closer to the “cerebral unconscious” tradition (based on reflexes) rather than the “hereditary unconscious” tradition to which it is more often traced. Le Bon’s focus on the malleability of the unconscious through reflexes and manipulation, brings him closer to Pavlov than to Jung. And maybe suggest rethinking the links between behaviorism and classical French thought in the context of concepts such as habit and costume.
Foule, embryologie, automatisme : à propos de la notion d’« inconscient » chez Gustave Le Bon
Francesco Gallino
2023-01-01
Abstract
Gustave Le Bon’s seminal work on crowd behavior Psychologie des foules (1895) has often been criticized for its lack of scientific rigor. In this paper, I argue that a closer examination of Le Bon’s earlier work on biology, and especially of his studies on the psychiatry of the spinal cord, as well as of his later work on pedagogy, can help to better frame the theme of crowd intelligence as it is posed in the 1895 text. In particular, I argue that the description of crowds as “automatic” and “unconscious” in no way implies, from Le Bon’s evolutionist perspective, a devaluation of the cognitive efficacy of their intelligence. Moreover, building on the antinomy coined in the 1990s by Marcel Gauchet, I suggest that Le Bon’s conception of the unconscious is closer to the “cerebral unconscious” tradition (based on reflexes) rather than the “hereditary unconscious” tradition to which it is more often traced. Le Bon’s focus on the malleability of the unconscious through reflexes and manipulation, brings him closer to Pavlov than to Jung. And maybe suggest rethinking the links between behaviorism and classical French thought in the context of concepts such as habit and costume.File | Dimensione | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|
essais-12214.pdf
Accesso aperto
Tipo di file:
PDF EDITORIALE
Dimensione
374.41 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
374.41 kB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.