Zeitgeist

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeitgeist

For other uses, see Zeitgeist (disambiguation).

This article may be expanded with text translated from the corresponding article in
German. (October 2012) Click [show] for important translation instructions.

The Zeitgeist (;[1] spirit of the age or spirit of the time) is the dominant set of ideals and
beliefs that motivate the actions of the members of a society in a particular period in time.
For example, the Zeitgeist of modernism motivated the creation of new forms in the fields
of architecture, art, and fashion during much of the 20th century. Zeitgeist is a powerful
force embedded in the individuals of a society.[2] The German word Zeitgeist, translated
literally as "time mind" or "time spirit", is often attributed to the philosopher Georg Hegel,
but he never actually used the word. In his works such as Lectures on the Philosophy of
History, he uses the phrase der Geist seiner Zeit (the spirit of his time)—for example, "no
man can surpass his own time, for the spirit of his time is also his own spirit."[3]

Other philosophers who were associated with such ideas include Herder and Spencer and
Voltaire.[2] The concept contrasts with the Great Man theory popularized by Thomas
Carlyle, which sees history as the result of the actions of heroes and geniuses.

Hegel believed that art reflected, by its very nature, the culture of the time in which it is
created. Culture and art are inextricable because an individual artist is a product of his or
her time and therefore brings that culture to any given work of art. Furthermore, he believed
that in the modern world it was impossible to produce classical art, which he believed
represented a "free and ethical culture", which depended more on the philosophy of art and
theory of art, rather than a reflection of the social construct, or Zeitgeist in which a given
artist lives.[4]

Theory and leadership

As mentioned, zeitgeist theory of leadership is often contrasted with Thomas Carlyle’s
great man theory.[5] In his theory, Carlyle stresses that leaders do not become leaders by
fate or accident. Instead, these individuals possess characteristics of great leaders and
these characteristics allow them to obtain positions of power.

However, Russian novelist Leo Tolstoy disagreed with Carlyle’s perspective.[5] Tolstoy
believed that leadership, like other things, was a "zeitgeist" and was a product of the social
circumstances at the time. Thus, it was not the characteristics of the individual that resulted
in a leadership, but societal factors of the time that are out of the individuals’ control.

Great man theory and zeitgeist theory can be included in two main areas of thought in
psychology.[5] For instance, great man theory is very similar to the trait approach. Trait
researchers are interested in identifying the various personality traits that underline human
behaviors such as conformity, leadership or other social behaviors. Thus, they agree that
1/4
leadership is primarily a quality of an individual and that some people are pre-dispositioned
to be a leader whereas others are born to follow these leaders. In contrast, situationist
researchers believe that social behavior is a product of society. That is, social influence is
what determines human behaviors. Therefore, situationism is of the same opinion as
zeitgeist theory—leaders are created from the social environment and are molded from the
situation. The concept of zeitgeist also relates to the sociological tradition that stems from
Émile Durkheim and recently developed into social capital theory as exemplified by the
work of Patrick Hunout.

These two perspectives have been combined to create what is known as the interactional
approach to leadership.[5] This approach asserts that leadership is developed through the
mixing of personality traits and the situation. Further, this approach was expressed by
social psychologist, Kurt Lewin, by the equation B = f(P, E) where behavior (B) is a function
(f) of the person (P) and the environment (E).

Examples in sciences
See also: Multiple discovery
Errors of illusion are not readily apparent because the shared beliefs and
assumptions of a particular era that support them come from the zeitgeist. An
example can be seen with Henry H. Goddard and Lewis Terman. The consensus in
the 20th century was that existing psychology tests adequately measured basic
intelligence in diverse groups of people. The more recent consensus is that "culture-
fair" tests need to be developed - which may or may not be true. But because of the
zeitgeist, in those times, the cross-cultural validity of existing tests was not
questioned.[6]
Failure to question research findings that agree with prevailing political and
philosophical ideology represents one of the effects of the zeitgeist.[6]
The zeitgeist does not always have negative effects. It can stimulate new ideas and
creative solutions to problems. An example is seen in the different models and
metaphors chosen to describe behavior and consciousness.[6]
Charles Darwin's proposition that evolution occurs by natural selection has been cited
as a case of the zeitgeist, since his contemporary, Alfred Russel Wallace, was
outlining similar models to Darwin during the same period (ideas that were jointly
presented to the public).[6] This view is disputed, however, by accounts that
emphasize the relative simplicity of Wallace's model, and which highlight a supposed
novelty within Darwin's likewise simplistic contribution.[7]
The zeitgeist of the 1920s revolved around logical positivism. Due to this, the great
men and women of that time were able to impact psychology, such as Watson,
Tolman, and Guthrie. This is important because their work on behavioral psychology
was able to work against eugenics. Before this time behavioral psychology was not
able to impact the field since it did not fit with the spirit of the times. For example,
Twitmyer Edwin B. Twitmyer wrote a paper on the patellar reflex in 1902, but it came
too early to have the impact it deserved. [6]
B F Skinner being unseated during the cognitive revolution is another example of the
zeitgeist in psychology. The zeitgeist was changing during this time, people wanted
to show more interest in humans, and more people were becoming interested in
2/4
 personality psychology. However, in the 1950s his new experimental approach to
psychology using inductive reasoning and descriptive behaviorism was seen as novel
and practical. Especially in contrast with psychoanalysts, whose assertions and
interpretations were largely immune to rigorous, empirical inquiry, thus making
validation a rather problematic task.[6]
In medical practice clinicians should be aware of the current zeitgeist when making a
decision regarding a patients care or treatment.

Examples of models in business

Executives, venture capitalists, journalists and authors have argued that the idea of a
zeitgeist is useful in understanding the emergence of industries, simultaneous invention
and evaluating the relative value of innovations. Malcolm Gladwell argued in his book
Outliers that entrepreneurs who succeeded often share similar characteristics—early
personal or significant exposure to knowledge and skills in the early stages of a nascent
industry. He proposed that the timing of involvement in an industry and often in sports as
well affected the probability of success. In Silicon Valley, a number of people (Peter Thiel,
Alistair Davidson, Mac Levchin, Nicholas G. Carr, Vinod Khosla[8]) have argued that much
innovation has been shaped by easy access to the Internet, open source software,
component technologies for both hardware and software (e.g., software libraries, software
as a service), and the ability to reach narrow markets across a global market. Peter Thiel
has commented: "There is so much incrementalism now."[9]

In a zeitgeist market, the number of new entrants is high, differentiation in high value
products (the strongest predictor of new product success) is more difficult to achieve, and
business models emphasizing service and solution over product and process will enhance
success. Examples include innovation in product experience, legal rights and bundling,
privacy rights, and agency (where businesses act on behalf of customers).[10][11][12][13]

See also

References
1. Jump up ^ oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com
2. ^ Jump up to: a b Eero Saarinen (2006), Shaping the Future, Yale University Press,
p. 15, ISBN 978-0-972-48812-9
3. Jump up ^ Glenn Alexander Magee (2010), "Zeitgeist (p. 262)", The Hegel
Dictionary, London: A & C Black, ISBN 978-1-847-06591-9
4. Jump up ^ Hendrix, John Shannon. Aesthetics & The Philosophy Of Spirit. New
York: Peter Lang. (2005). 4, 11.
5. ^ Jump up to: a b c d Forsyth, D. R. (2009). Group dynamics: New York: Wadsworth.
[Chapter 9]
6. ^ Jump up to: a b c d e f Hothersall, D., "History of Psychology", 2004
7. Jump up ^ Bowler, Peter J., The Non-Darwinian Revolution (1988)
8. Jump up ^ "Silicon Valley's Trouble with Innovation". MIT Technology Review.
9. Jump up ^ "Peter Thiel". Bloomberg.
3/4
 10. Jump up ^ "Max Levchin". MIT Technology Review.
11. Jump up ^ Nicholas Carr (6 July 2012). "Why Modern Innovation Traffics in Trifles -
WSJ". WSJ.
12. Jump up ^ Vinod Khosla. "Vinod Khosla: Maintain the Silicon Valley Vision". The
New York Times.
13. Jump up ^ "The Book - Innovation Zeitgeist". eclicktick.com.

External links

Look up zeitgeist or spiritus mundi in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.

4/4