Subjectivity and Objectivity in the Contemporary Psychology: Historical, Epistemological and Philosophical Notes
Abstract
We resume the philosophical and methodological analysis on psychological knowledge by authors from the first half of the twentieth century in order to establish a dialogue with those authors from the first decade of the twenty-first century who, historically, epistemologically and philosophically, discuss the path taken by the psychology to establish itself as a science, in line with the discussions on the history of the creation of the scientific objectivity notion and on the subjective elements of that construction. We highlight that the particular focus is on the definition of the research method, on considering subjectivity and on the discussion about consciousness. We point out a consensus over time: the demand for a critical and reflexive analysis on the production of the psychological knowledge and the affinity of this production with the research practice and the professional practice. Dialoguing with different authors, we conclude that the epistemological, philosophical and historical analysis of the psychological knowledge has allowed the development of an innovative way of conceiving the research practice and the professional practice which, rather than denying the cultural and political biases, started the methodological search that allows considering them.Downloads
References
Asch, M. G., & Sturn, T. (2007). Psychology's territories: historical and contemporary perspectives from different disciplines. Mawah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Bronckart, J. P. (1985). Les bases épistémologiques de la psychologie. In : Bronckart, J. P. (Org.) Vygotsky aujourd´hui. Neuchâtel, Suisse ; Paris, France: Delachau et Niestlé.
Brown, A. L.; Metz, K. & Campione, J. C. (1996). Social interaction and individual understanding of learners: the influence of Piaget and Vygotsky. In: A. Tryfon & J. Vonèche. (Ed.) Piaget-Vygotsky: the social genesis of thought. Sussex, UK: Psychology Press, p. 145-170.
Bruner, J. (1985). Vygotsky: a historical and conceptual perspectives. In: J. V. Wertsch (Edit.) Culture, communication and cognition: Vygotskian perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, p.21-34.
Corazza, S. M. (2000). História da infância sem fim. Ijuí: Unijuí.
Cruz, L.; Hillesheim, B. & Guareschi, N. M. F. (2005). Infância e Políticas públicas: um olhar sobre as práticas psi. Psicologia& Sociedade, 17(3), p. 42-49.
Danziger, K. (1979). The positivist repudiation of Wundt. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 15, 205-230.
Danziger, K. (1997). Naming the mind: how psychology found its language. London: Sage.
Danziger, K. (2006). The practice of psychological discourse. In Grauman, C. F., & Gergen, K. J. Historical dimensions of psychological discourse. [First paperback version]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 17-35.
Danziger, K. (2013). Psychology and its history. Theory & Psychology, 23(6), 829-839.
Daston, L. (2006). The naturalized female intellect. [First paperback version] In Grauman, C. F., & Gergen, K. J. Historical dimensions of psychological discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 165-192.
Ferrari, M.; Robinson, D. K. & Yasnitsky, A. (2010). Wundt, Vygotsky and Bandura: a cultural-historical science of consciousness in three acts. History of the Human Sciences, 23(3), 95-118.
Gergen, K. J. (2010). The acculturated brain. Theory & Psychology, 20(6), 795-816.
Graumann, C. F. & Gergen, K. J. (2006). Historical dimensions of psychological discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [First paperback version]
James. W. (1904). Does consciousness exist? Journal of Philosophy, Psychology, and Scientific Methods, 1, pp. 477-491.
Keller, E. F. (1996). The dilemma of scientific subjectivity in positive culture. In Galison, P., & Stump, D. J. (Eds.). The Disunity of Science: boundaries, contexts, and power. Stanford, CA: Stanforn University Press, 417-427.
Martí, E. (1996). Mechanisms of internalisation and externalisation of knowlodge in Piaget’s and Vygotsky’s theories. In: A. Tryphon & J. Vonèche (Edt.) Piaget-Vygotsky. The social genesis of thought, UK: Psychology. Press, pp. 57-83.
Morawski, J. G. (2005). Reflexivity and the psychologist. History of the Human Science, 18(4), 77-105.
Parker, I. (2009). Critical psychology and revolutionary. Theory & Psychology, 19(1), 71-92.
Pascual-Leone, J. (1996).Vygotsky, Piaget and the problems of Plato, Swiss Journal of Psycholoy, 55(2/3), p. 81-92, 1996. Recuperado de: http://www.yorku.ca/tcolab/pdfs/Vygotsky_Piaget_72_image.pdf.
Piaget, J. (1925). Psychologie et critique de la connaissance. Archives de Psychology, (19), 193-210. Recuperado de: http://www.fondationjeanpiaget.
Piaget, J. (1972). L'épistémologie des relations interdisciplinaires. In L’interdisciplinarité: problèmes d’enseignement et de recherche dans les universités. Paris: OCDE, pp. 154-171.
Piaget, J. (1977). A tomada de consciência. São Paulo: Edições Melhoramentos; Editora de São Paulo.
Richards, G. (2002). The psychology of psychology. A history grounded sketch. Theory & Psychology, 12(1), 7-36.
Robinson, D. N. (2010). Consciousness. The first frontier. Theory & Psychology, 20(6), 781-793.
Rosenzweig, S. (1933). The experimental situation as a Psychological Problem. Psychological Review, 40, 337-354.
Shapin, S. (2012, April). The sciences of subjectivity. Social Studies of Science, 42(2), 170-184.
Smedslund, J. (2009). The mismatch between current research methods and the nature of psychological phenomena. Theory & Psychology, 19(6), 778-794.
Smedslund, J. (2012a). The bricoleur model of psychological practice. Theory & Psychology, 22(5), 643-657.
Smedslund, J. (2012b). What follows from what we all know about human beings. Theory & Psychology, 22(5), 658-668.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1979, Summer). Consciousness as a Problem in the Psychology of Behavior. Soviet Psychology, 17 (4), 3-35.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1996). Teoria e método em psicologia. Tradução de: Berliner, C. São Paulo: Martins Fontes.
Wallon, H. (1959). Science de la nature et science de l'homme: la psychologie. Enfance. 12(3-4), 203-219.
Wallon, H. (1963) Psychologie et matérialisme dialectique. Enfance, Numéro spécial “Henri Wallon, buts et méthodes dela psychologie”, (1), 31-34, 1963.
Wertsch, J. V. (1985a). The mediation of mental life: L. S. Vygotsky and M. M. Bakhtin. In E. Mertz & R. J. Parmentier (Orgs.), Semiotic mediation. Sociocultural and psychological perspectives. Orlando, Flórida: Academic Press. pp. 49-71.
Wertsch, J. V. (1985b). La médiation sémiotique de la vie mentale: L. S. Vygotsky et M. M. Bakhtine. In J. P. Bronckart & P. Mounoud (Orgs.), Vygotsky aujourd’hui. Neuchâtel et Paris: Delachaux & Niestlé. pp. 239-268.
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.
