THE PSYCHOLOGICAL ARGUMENTS IN THE STRUCTURE OF SCIENTIFIC REVOLUTIONS BY THOMAS KUHN
Abstract
The role and recognition of psychology in the field of epistemology has always been the vector of various controversies. Among authors who rejected it and others who chose it as an important element, we highlight the historian and philosopher of science Thomas Kuhn. In the present article we will list the various arguments and all the psychological theories cited by that epistemologist in the course of his most influential work: The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. The way Kuhn uses psychological knowledge reveals how his propositions on scientific construction rescue the epistemological value of psychology because, when describing the processes inherent to a scientific revolution, the sociological and historical approach was invariably supplemented by the field of psychology. Thus, to explain the current conformation and engenderment of the "hard sciences", it was necessary to resort to the "soft sciences". In face of this apparent contradiction, we will depart from the situation in which critiques of Kuhn's alleged subjectivism involve psychology to understand how the author employs it in what he called "the psychology of scientific inquiry." Consequently, we will answer questions arising from this use, such as the statute of scientificity of psychology within its own theories and the legitimacy thereof as an epistemological tool.Downloads
References
Assis, J.P. (1993). Kuhn e as Ciências Sociais. Estudos Avançados, 7(19), 133-164.
Bruner, J.S. & Postman, L. (1949). On the Perception of Incongruity: a paradigma. Journal of Personality, XVIII, 206-223.
Bruner, J.S. & Postman, L.; Rodrigues, J. (1950). Expectation and the Perception of color. American Journal of Psychology, LXIV, 216-227.
Brunetti, J. (2013). Thomas Kuhn: ¿Epistemólogo o psicólogo de la ciencia? Revista iberoamericana de ciencia tecnología y sociedade, 22(8), 191-212.
Brunetti, J. & Ormart, E.B. (2010). El Lugar de la Psicologia em la Epistemologia de Kuhn: la possibilidad de una psicologia de lainvestigación científica. Cinta Moebio, 38, 110-121.
Chalmers, A.F. (1993). O que é a Ciência Afinal? São Paulo: Brasiliense.
Garcia, R. & Piaget, J. (2011). Psicogênese e História das Ciências. Petrópolis, RJ: Vozes.
Hadamard, J. (1954). An Essay on the Psychology of Invention in the Mathematical Field. New York: Dover.
Jastrow, J. (2007). Fact and Fable in Psychology. Whitefish, MT: Kessinger.
Koffka, K. (1975). Princípios de Psicologia da Gestalt. São Paulo: Cultrix.
Kuhn, T.S. (1989a). Reconsiderações acerca dos Paradigmas. In A Tensão Essencial (pp. 353-382). São Paulo: UNESP.
Kuhn, T.S. (1989b). Uma Função para as Experiências Mentais. In A Tensão Essencial (pp. 293-321). São Paulo: UNESP.
Kuhn, T.S. (1989c). A Tensão Essencial: tradição e invenção na investigação científica. In A Tensão Essencial (pp. 275-291). São Paulo: UNESP.
Kuhn, T.S. (2007). A Estrutura das Revoluções Científicas. São Paulo: Perspectiva.
Piaget, J. (1970). The Child’s Conception of Movementand Speed. New York: Basic Books.
Piaget, J. (2001). The Child’s Conception of Physicalcausality. Piscataway, NJ: Transaction.
Poincaré, J.H. (2014). The Foundations of Science: Science and Hypothesis, The Value of Science, Science and Method. New York: The Science.
Polanyi, M. (1974). Personal Knowledge: towards a post-critical philosopy. Chicago: University Chicago.
Scheffler, I. (1982). Science and Subjectivity (2nd ed.). Indianápolis, IN: Hackett.
Wallas, G. (2014). The Art of Thought. Inglaterra: Solis Press.
As opiniões emitidas, são de exclusiva responsabilidade do(s) autor(es). Ao submeterem o manuscrito ao Conselho Editorial de Psicologia em Estudo, o(s) autor(es) assume(m) a responsabilidade de não ter previamente publicado ou submetido o mesmo manuscrito por outro periódico. Em caso de autoria múltipla, o manuscrito deve vir acompanhado de autorização assinada por todos os autores. Artigos aceitos para publicação passam a ser propriedade da revista, podendo ser remixados e reaproveitados conforme prevê a licença Creative Commons CC-BY.
The opinions expressed are the sole responsibility of the author (s). When submitting the manuscript to the Editorial Board of Study Psychology, the author (s) assumes responsibility for not having previously published or submitted the same manuscript by another journal. In case of multiple authorship, the manuscript must be accompanied by an authorization signed by all authors. Articles accepted for publication become the property of the journal, and can be remixed and reused as provided for in theby a license Creative Commons CC-BY.
