Cleaning Up or Throwing out the Psychological Insight with the Bath Water

Author:

Joranger LineORCID

Abstract

AbstractIn their article Psychology: a Giant with Feet of Clay, Zagaria, Andò and Zennaro aim to clean up the confusing and inconsistent conceptual landscape in current psychology. They find that evolutionary psychology with its dialectical focus on nature and nurture could be the unifying meta-theory that contemporary psychology is depending on in order to compete with harder sciences, such as biology and physiology. The aim of developing a unified conceptual consensus in psychology is flattering. However, the view depends on a worldview that one can reach a psychological science with objective properties through universal concepts that are non-effected by cognitive factors. My point of view is that psychological concepts carry a great deal of implicit theoretical baggage because they come with rich connotations, acquired through everyday usage. My view has got a methodological point that leads to considerations concerning the question: how psychologists are to study concepts in order to understand them? To grasp the meaning of a given concept in its context means to understand not only its literal meaning but also how it can be applied to the world and what is done by it. All these dimensions of the meaning of a concept are deeply rooted in the respective diachronic and synchronic contexts, and that is why a psychologist should be radically prepared to change her or his expectations considering the meaning of any concept under study.

Funder

University Of South-Eastern Norway

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Subject

Philosophy,Applied Psychology,Anthropology,Communication,Cultural Studies,Social Psychology

Reference57 articles.

1. Brinkmann, S. (2020). Moving on our Feet: For a Nomadic Psychology. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-020-09529-0.

2. Burman, E. (2008). Deconstructing developmental psychology. London: Routledge.

3. Carmines, E. G., & Zeller, R. A. (1979). Reliability and validity assessment (Quantitative applications in the social sciences, Vol. 17). Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.

4. Danziger, K. (1997). Naming the mind: How psychology found its language. London: Sage publications.

5. Feyerabend, P. (1975). Against method: Outline of an anarchistic theory of knowledge. London: NLB.

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3