It is widely believed that the Nazis were opposed to science in general and to psychology in particular, with the result that they obstructed the development of psychology in every way or indeed threatened its very existence. In fact, the history of the professionalization of psychology during the National Socialist period was not one of setbacks and defeats, but one of gains and successes. This is certainly not easy for psychologists to admit, which is perhaps one of the reasons this aspect of the history of German psychology has often been passed over. After the Second World War German psychologists were more concerned with reestablishing their profession than with raising the question of the relationship between psychology and Nazism. Within the discipline there was some controversy, but public discussion was prevented by professional considerations and the politics of scholarly rivalries, not to mention the general difficulties of “reappraising the past” in Germany (see Adorno 1968).

In undertaking to produce a theoretical and historical critique of test diagnostics, I began by looking at the history of psychological tests and the reasons for their development and practical use. In the course of the work it became clear that the Nazi period was the least well researched, but at the same time the one that posed the most questions: What did psychologists do in the Third Reich? How was the field of psychology able to develop? How was it obstructed or encouraged, supported or abandoned? These questions led me into uncharted areas on which few reports existed and about which the German postwar generation knew little, except through hearsay.

A first look at the material, especially scientific publications from the Nazi period, confronted me with a multitude of facts that defied organization. There had been racist typology, but it did not seem possible to understand the history of German psychology in this period solely in terms of ideological Nazification. There had been practical, diagnostic psychology, particularly in the armed forces; there had been professional psychologists; and - in the middle of the war - examination regulations had been introduced for a certificate recognized by the state. But the history of German psychology could also not be described simply as an instrumentalization for the goals of expansion and oppression. There had been dismissals, and some scientists had been persecuted; but the common opinion that psychology had been politically subjugated did not seem to explain all the facts.

The first profession for psychologists was that of academic researcher and lecturer. Here we are interested in practical psychology as an occupation outside the university. What were the reasons for the employment of expert “psychologists” in various areas of German society? How were corresponding professional roles institutionalized, and what was the demand for psychologists? We will also consider the problem of competition from other professional groups, a point emphasized in the introductory model.

The development of psychology as an occupation cannot necessarily be deduced from the problems considered by psychology as a science. Problems taken up by psychology before Wundt did not simply become fields of applied psychology. Questions concerning the self-image of the citizen, for example, a psychological topic around 1800 (Jaeger and Staeuble 1978), did not find any place in institutionalized psychology. Problems of social integration (see Bruckner 1974, p. 15) were considered only much later; they were left to educational, judicial, and punitive institutions. In applied psychology attention was focused primarily on questions of training and deploying the work force. Pedagogical and industrial psychology were the two central elements. The fact that the originally broader term “applied psychology,” or “psychotechnics” as it was widely known, came to mean “industrial psychology” is a reflection of psychology's selection of problem areas in the twenties. A further selection occurred in the course of transition from a field of scientific reflection to a field of practical professional activity.

The increased attention given to practical questions provided the major impulse for the institutionalization of psychology at the universities. It is possible for a discipline to enjoy such success for some time solely on the basis of fine words and promises. The social sciences live to some extent from the continual promise to develop new remedies for changing social problems. However, if the professionalization of psychology was to be successful in the long term, it could not just make promises, but would have to provide knowledge that could actually be applied.

Not all of the theories and methods of psychology were of professional use, and therefore of importance for its professionalization. Among the mixed bag of psychological wares, practical demand existed mainly for diagnostic assessment and the selection of personnel in industry and the armed forces, the two areas in which the professional development of psychology in Germany started (see Chapter 4). The need was for models and instruments that described and determined the abilities and personality traits of blue-and white-collar workers, soldiers, and officers. In fact, it can be said that in the period under examination the knowledge relevant to the profession was that of the selection and motivation of capable and conscientious workers and army specialists, and of strong-willed, self-controlled officer cadet applicants with leadership qualities, from among seventeen- to nineteen-year-old high school graduates. Psychotechnics, the psychology of expression, and characterology were therefore essential for the professionalization of psychology.

A problem for students of psychology in the twenties or thirties was the fact that there was really no qualification for professional activity outside the university. The only possibility was a doctorate, for which psychology was often not recognized as an independent subject. By the end of the thirties the growing demand for professional psychologists created pressure for academic training that prepared for these professional activities. The contradiction between the two was overcome by introducing an examination to confirm the ability or entitlement to exercise a profession. A prerequisite, of course, was some consensus about the scientific training necessary.

The DPO for psychology in 1941 were the first of their sort and the result of a lengthy process. In this chapter we will look at the possibilities of obtaining qualification in psychology before 1941, at the suggestions made to adapt purely scientific education to meet professional needs, at the interests that led to the fruition of these plans at the time, and at the concept of preparatory qualification that found expression in the DPO.

In the early days psychology was always studied together with other subjects, forming at most a specialty area. The general regulations for doctorates required three subjects to be examined orally, with psychology often not even qualifying as a subject in its own right. In 1935 Rupp expressed the opinion that not many students chose psychology as the major subject for their doctorate because it did not offer any secure career prospects (Rep 76/37, f. 44).

In the history of the academic institutionalization of psychology in Germany the National Socialist period is part of the phase of its establishment as an independent discipline. In Germany this was largely a matter of setting up new professorships in the universities. These usually bring institutes, personnel, budgets, libraries, and so forth in their wake. This chapter therefore examines the extent to which psychology gained or lost chairs during the Third Reich. This quantitative question is accompanied by a qualitative one: What reasons were there for the loss or creation of chairs in psychology, and what teaching and research contents were to be institutionalized? This question of the content of institutionalization will also be pursued by studying the appointments to chairs; this will act as a gauge of the development of demands placed on the subject and the orientation of the subject itself. While the investigation concentrates on universities, the technical colleges (Technische Hochschulen) are also considered. The representation of psychology in pedagogical academies and other teacher training institutes will be considered in Chapter 4 on the development of occupational fields for the profession.

Before the introduction of the Diploma Examination Regulations, or DPO (Diplom-Priifungsordnung), in 1941, each newly created chair of psychology had to be justified for that particular university, which led on occasion to severe disputes. With the DPO, however, the need for new chairs resulted from a state regulation, since it was possible to train psychologists only at universities with a chair.

early modern Italian science has received and continues to receive so much attention that no summary or synopsis could do justice to the available historiography. Therefore, this essay does not try to offer a synthetic picture of the development of the various scientific disciplines in Italy between 1500 and 1700. Instead, taking the title of this book seriously, I will try to locate some of the conditions that framed the development and subsequent crisis of Italian science during the Scientific Revolution. Some comparison of the cultural and political contexts of Italy and other European countries will help identify possible connections between different national contexts and different aspects or phases of the Scientific Revolution. The essay concludes by suggesting a range of homologies between the development of scientific discourse, authorship and institutionalization during the Scientific Revolution and what Norbert Elias has called the ‘civilizing process’ – the development of court society, political absolutism and the modern state.

DECLINE OR MARGINALIZ ATION?

For some time, the crisis of Italian science after Galileo's death was conveniently explained away by the religious obscurantism that was claimed to have set in after his trial in 1633. The attribution of such a central causal role to the trial reflects a tendency in the older historiography to turn Galileo's career (with its brilliant start and abrupt ending) into the epitome of Italian modern national science.

The overarching mission of the French public health reformers was hygienism, a belief that all areas of life should be medicalized and moralized to prevent disease and promote public health in the interest of social order and national security. Hygienism was developed within a statist context. French society was to be medicalized and moralized by state agencies and institutions, with professional hygienists serving the state as advisors and hygienic missionaries. This did not necessarily imply the bureaucratization of medicine, however, although some favored this approach, since physicians in private practice might also carry out these goals. The notion of hygienism was derived in part from prevailing theories of disease causation, which attributed most diseases to environmental and social causes. Since almost anything might potentially cause disease, hygienism had to be all-encompassing. The experts, the professional hygienists who were to act as advisors and help determine policy, had to achieve authority and legitimacy by cloaking their work with the mantle of science. The increasing scientism of French society required that if a particular approach or discipline was to be taken seriously, it had to be scientific. Hygienism thus incorporated a community of practitioners, professional hygienists who applied scientific methods to the study of public health problems and sought to transform public hygiene into a scientific discipline. The method was an important part of the mission.

Hygienism outlived Pasteur. Indeed, Pasteur's discovery that microorganisms caused some diseases provided further scientific justification for the program of the hygienists.

the geographical position of the Iberian peninsula helps to explain why the history of Spain and Portugal has in some respects been so different from the rest of Europe. Situated at the western periphery of Europe and much closer than any other part of the continent to Africa, these were the lands which were most affected by the onslaught of Islam. When in the early eighth century the armies of the Prophet crossed the Straits from north Africa they conquered almost the entire Iberian peninsula and they would remain for centuries, transmitting indelible Arabic cultural infuences, more pronounced than anywhere else in Europe. And that was still perceptible in peninsular science of the early modern period. Geography also partly explains why Portugal and Spain were the first European countries to undertake those voyages of discovery which led to the acquisition of world-wide empires. Proximity to Africa, Europe's westernmost Atlantic seaboard, and the prevalence of favourable winds which would propel Columbus from the southern tip of Spain south-west to the Canaries and Caribbean were geographical advantages which assisted the Iberian navigations. And those navigations as well as the empires which resulted from them provided the strongest stimuli for the development of science in Spain and Portugal.

THE ORIENTAL TRADITIONS

Spain was much more affected by Muslim rule than Portugal. The linguistic inheritance indicates that. The Portuguese language has incorporated some 500 Arabic words; Castilian contains around 4,000.