We will always learn more about human life and human personality from novels than from scientific psychology. (Noam Chomsky) To what extent do you agree?

Authors Avatar

“We will always learn more about human life and human personality from novels than from scientific psychology.” (Noam Chomsky) To what extent do you agree?

Noam Chomsky did not merely state that novels will offer a wider scope and insight into humanity as compared to scientific psychology, he also supported his reasoning with the fact that literature, novels in particular, focuses on exploring “the full human person”. Both psychology and novels offer insights into human personality and behavior, but in different ways. Scientific psychology attempts to establish objectively a general pattern of human behavior. In contrast, novels explore the breadth and depth of human subjectivity; as Milan Kundera writes “all novels, of every age, are concerned with the enigma of the self.”  Novels and scientific psychology both contribute to our understanding of human life and personality; the former explores the isolated self, whereas the latter offers insight to the functioning of our brain. We cannot neglect one or the other as they are both important in understanding human behavior.

The most significant difference between scientific psychology and novels is that they attempt to explore the human psyche through different ways of knowing. Literature is part of the arts, which uses emotion as a way of knowing. A novelist shares his knowledge and perception of the human world as he is writing his book. If there had been no Shakespeare, then the famous lines “To be or not to be” uttered by Hamlet would not have existed. However, if Isaac Newton had not discovered gravity, another scientist would have done so eventually. Knowledge created by novels, or the arts in general, is not replicable and extremely unique, and most importantly it serves to explore what it is to be human. Novelists write in order to communicate their emotions (I don’t believe this is entirely true. Novelists are clearly interested in ideas as well as emotions. In fact, they often present an emotional character in order to explore an idea or a theory about why we fell what we feel or why we do what we do. Try not to confuse the emotional content of a novel with the novelist himself.) about a particular topic or situation, which, once understood by the reader, will allow the reader to empathize and feel it as well. Novels explore the depth and variety of human consciousness; they exemplify our individuality and uniqueness; which is what scientific psychology fails to do.

Join now!

I believe your use of the word emotion is misplaced. You would be better off using the word “consciousness” instead.

Scientific psychology attempts to reach a conclusion through reason. The way scientific psychologists use two methods to reach a conclusion; they observe patterns of human behavior and tendencies, establish a theory, and lastly perform a set of experiments to support their theory. The reliability and objectivity that scientific psychology embodies is advantageous because it can be applied in reality. Scientific psychology has made a variety of contributions to the real world, cognitive psychology has enhanced education; biological psychology has given ...

This is a preview of the whole essay