Advertisement

The Problem Psychology: A Science Yet to Become a Science

  • Aaro Toomela
Chapter
Part of the SpringerBriefs in Psychology book series (BRIEFSPSYCHOL)

Abstract

In this chapter it is demonstrated that psychology today is immature science that is based on undeveloped and relatively primitive epistemology. Following and elaborating Kuhn’s and Vygotsky’s theories, pre-paradigmatic, paradigmatic, and post- or metaparadigmatic stages of science development are distinguished. Necessity of unifying theory of psychology is discussed.

Keywords

Pre-paradigmatic Paradigmatic Metaparadigmatic Crisis of psychology 

References

  1. Allik, J. (2018). Kuidas inimese vaim kasvab ja areneb. Akadeemia, 30(6), 1111–1122.Google Scholar
  2. Allport, G. W. (1937). Personality. A psychological interpretation. New York, NY: Henry Holt and Company.Google Scholar
  3. Benveniste, E. (1971). Problems in general linguistics. Miami linguistics series no. 8. Coral Gables, FL: University of Miami Press.Google Scholar
  4. Brentano, F. (1995). Psychology from an empirical standpoint. (Originally published in German, 1874). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  5. Darwin, C. (1872). The origin of species by means of natural selection or the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life (6th ed.). London: Odhams Press.Google Scholar
  6. Gilbert, D. T., King, G., Pettigrew, S., & Wilson, T. D. (2016). Comment on “estimating the reproducibility of psychological science”. Science, 351(6277), 1037a.  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aad7243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hegel, G. W. F. (2008). Encyclopedia of the philosophical sciences. Philosophy of mind. (Originally published in 1830). In W. Wallace (Ed.), Georg H. W. Hegel. Philosophy of mind. Translated from the encyclopedia of the philosophical sciences. New York, NY: Cosimo Classics.Google Scholar
  8. Kant, I. (2007). Critique of judgement. (Originally published in 1790). In N. Walker (Ed.), Immanuel Kant. Critique of judgement. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Kleinginna, P. R., & Kleinginna, A. M. (1981a). A categorized list of emotion definitions, with suggestions for a consensual definition. Motivation and Emotion, 5(4), 345–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kleinginna, P. R., & Kleinginna, A. M. (1981b). A categorized list of motivation definitions, with a suggestion for a consensual definition. Motivation and Emotion, 5(3), 263–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kroeber, A. L., & Kluckhohn, C. (1952). Culture: A critical review of concepts and definitions. New York, NY: Vintage Books.Google Scholar
  12. Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions (second edition, enlarged). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  13. Mackintosh, N. J. (1998). IQ and human intelligence. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Ohlsson, S. (2010). Questions, patterns and explanations, not hypothesis testing, is the core of psychology as of any science. In A. Toomela & J. Valsiner (Eds.), Methodological thinking in psychology: 60 years gone astray? (pp. 27–43). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
  15. Open-Science-Collaboration. (2015). Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science, 349(6251), aac4716.  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aac4716.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Toomela, A. (2007). Culture of science: Strange history of the methodological thinking in psychology. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 41(1), 6–20.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-007-9004-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Toomela, A. (2008). Variables in psychology: A critique of quantitative psychology. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 42(3), 245–265.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-008-9059-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Toomela, A. (2009). How methodology became a toolbox: And how it escapes from that box. In J. Valsiner, P. Molenaar, M. Lyra, & N. Chaudhary (Eds.), Dynamic process methodology in the social and developmental sciences (pp. 45–66). New York, NY: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Toomela, A. (2010). Quantitative methods in psychology: Inevitable and useless. Frontiers in Psychology, 1(29), 1–14.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2010.00029.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Toomela, A. (2011). Travel into a fairy land: A critique of modern qualitative and mixed methods psychologies. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 45(1), 21–47.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-010-9152-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Toomela, A. (2018). Arvustuse arvustus. Jüri Allik, “Kuidas inimese vaim kasvab ja areneb. Aaro Toomela. Kultuur, kõne ja Minu Ise. Tallinn: Eesti Keele Sihtasutus, 2016; Aaro Toomela. Minu Ise areng: Inimlapsest inimeseks. (Struktuursüsteemse psühholoogia alused 2.) Tartu: Väike Vanker, 2017”—Akadeemia 2018, 6, 1111–1122. Akadeemia, 30(12), 2254–2273.Google Scholar
  22. Toomela, A., & Valsiner, J. (2010). Methodological thinking in psychology: 60 years gone astray? Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
  23. Vygotsky, L. S. (1982a). Istoricheski smysl psikhologicheskogo krizisa. Metodologicheskoje issledovanije. (Historical meaning of the crisis in psychology. A methodological study. Originally written in 1927; First published in 1982). In A. R. Luria & M. G. Jaroshevskii (Eds.), L. S. Vygotsky. Sobranije sochinenii. Tom 1. Voprosy teorii i istorii psikhologii (pp. 291–436). Moscow: Pedagogika.Google Scholar
  24. Vygotsky, L. S. (1982b). Problema razvitija v strukturnoi psikhologii. Kriticheskoje issledovanije. (Problem of development in structural psychology. A critical study. Originally published in 1934). In A. R. Luria & M. G. Jaroshevskii (Eds.), L. S. Vygotsky. Sobranije sochinenii. Tom 1. Voprosy teorii i istorii psikhologii (pp. 238–290). Moscow: Pedagogika.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Aaro Toomela
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Natural Sciences and HealthTallinn UniversityTallinnEstonia

Personalised recommendations