This accessibility meant that it could be used by the sociologists Robert Park and Ernest Burgess in the same decade. So thinking about leadership was very clearly a result of multiple interactions that spilled over national boundaries. Arising out of the non-acceptance of the doomed world of the aristocrats, the obsession with leadership produced an abundant literature not only in the human and social sciences but also in politics, industry, and the military.
This fashion for reflecting about leadership was very closely connected with among other things the scientific study of management and the movement to rationalize industry, and thus with new ways of organizing individuals and work. It was thought that the inherent complexity of modern societies required persons who were proficient in certain skills, which social psychology was trying to identify, but never quite did.
In fact the relationship between leaders and their followers seemed like an abiding mystery. However, that relationship appeared to be demanded by particular historical factors in each of the four countries. In Russia the Revolution seemed to be a matter for leaders, since the Bolsheviks defined themselves as such; the October Revolution, which saw itself as a protest against existing forms of authority, paradoxically ended up putting into power a very strong hierarchy.
In the USA and France, the leader was a figure in democracies in which leadership powers were distributed according to the characteristics of the individual leaders. In the case of Franklin Roosevelt, the leader even appeared as the incarnation of democracy, because at the end of the s he was perceived as the only person able to save it from the perils of dictatorships.
A plan tries both to target objectives and to anticipate hazards. As an instrument for governing collective action that tries to avoid the unexpected, it has social and physical implications: the imposition of a hierarchy and the organization of space. Its effectiveness as a leadership technique depends on its ability to organize complexity.
That is the basis for the authority of a leader. However, that authority is tested whenever something unforeseen happens and requires that the working methods be adjusted. Moreover, according to Mattern, production cannot be directed remotely; one has to be present in order to monitor things and to solve any problems. During the first five-year plan in the Soviet Union, in the Poutilov factory in Leningrad there were several competing ideas about leadership and leaders.
During the same period was constructed a managerial apparatus that was flexible enough to keep up with changes in economic policies. In what was set up, the interest of the workers was never taken into account, and they began to harbour a deep hostility towards their superiors. For Stalin the proletariat must clearly be led by the leaders, with him as their leader in chief: he was to be the guide who sets up a mode of direct action for governing the society, the leading example being his tour of Siberia in to requisition wheat.
In other words, leaders are not simply those who act as such, but are those whose behaviour shapes their personality as leaders. In studying the leader as an image of modernity, and very clearly describing its problematic appearance in the twentieth century, Cohen comes up against the crucial problem of human conduct. To these two principles, Cohen adds a third: attention to action and its materiality. This enables him to see afresh the modalities of the exercise of authority and to discover meanings in disparate and heterogeneous facts. From this point of view, the trail he has blazed has proved to be very rich.
Cohen sticks to treating it as a historiographical exercise, as if the enormous erudition of that exercise did not involve any theoretical or epistemological shifts. Even with this more modest approach, history nevertheless does have the capacity to discuss the concepts of the philosophy that is in play.
History obviously should not forego using those concepts and making them do some work; it is also appropriate for history to test them against the facts and new conceptualizations. In other words, in a mutual and fruitful exchange, while philosophy can treat the past as a place in which to find questions and reflections related to thinking about contemporary societies, history should be allowed to examine the way that philosophy problematizes the issues. But he goes beyond that when he observes leaders acting. The shift from practices to action — i.
Nevertheless there are some problems. From this arises a third problem: what is the connection between pragmatic sensitivity, which puts action and experience at the centre of the investigation, and the evocation of Foucault, who thought in terms of practices and devices?
On the analytical level, this raises a question about the relationship between practicality and action.
Two positions appear to be juxtaposed. In the first part of the book, Cohen suggests that the actions of leaders follow from principles — such as those promoted by scientific management and Taylorism — and that actions are basically nothing but the actualization of such principles. However, in the second part he shows — particularly with the example of Stalin — that principles of authority and leadership emerge and then take shape in and through the actual commitments of leaders, who can always justify these commitments retrospectively.
So there seems to be a hiatus, which raises questions about the status given in this book to the very idea of practicality: is it descriptive depicting a chain of actions , or is it explanatory relating conduct to a norm? Alongside this question about the connection between practicality and action, the problem of normativity is obviously also an issue. En divisant le monde corporel en deux parties, le monde corporel interne ou physiologique et le monde corporel externe ou physique, Fechner distingue deux parties dans la psychophysique: Ainsi, la psychophysique est devenue chez Fechner la science de la mesure des sensations.
C'est Hering, en , qui attaqua la psychophysique de Fechner avec le plus de vigueur et de rigueur dans l'argumentation. Ce sont d'ailleurs les physiologistes germaniques ou d'influence germanique J. Einleitung in die Seelenlehre. Lehrbuch der Psychologie als Naturwissenschaft.
Die neue Psychologie Nouvelle psychologie, trad. Pragmatische Psychologie oder Seelenlehre in der Anwendung auf das Leben 2 vol. La fable du psychologisme de Fries. History of Psychology , 2 , Psychologie vom empirischen Standpunkt. In Gesammelte Schriften vol. Empirische Psychologie nach naturwissenschaftlicher Methode. Erste Grundlehren der mathematischen Psychologie.
Ueber die Fortbildung der Philosophie durch Herbart. Grundriss der Geschichte der Philosophie. History of Psychiatry , 8 , Elemente der Psychophysik 2 vol. Vorschule der Asthetik 2 vol. In Sachen der Psychophysik.
Revision der Hauptpunkte der Psychophysik. System der Psychologie als empirischer Wissenschaft aus der Beobachtung des innern Sinnes. Neue Kritik der Vernunft 3 vol. Handbuch der psychischen Anthropologie oder der Lehre von der Natur des menschlichen Geistes. Geschichte von den Seelen der Menschen und Thiere, preagmatische entworfen. Von den Ahndungen und Visionen. Psychologische Bemerkungen zur Tonlehre.
De attentionis mensura causisque primariis. Psychologie principia statica et mechanica. Write a customer review. Amazon Giveaway allows you to run promotional giveaways in order to create buzz, reward your audience, and attract new followers and customers.