Abstract
In this article I address some more aspects regarding Boesch’s ontological predication aiming to clarify mistaken comprehensions as appeared in Perez-Campos” (2017) detailed work on my former paper about this issue (Simão 2016b). With this purpose, the following three aspects will be approached: the philosophical roots of my former proposal; the place of Boesch’s symbolic action theory in that proposal and the relevance of this discussion for the relationship between ontology and psychology.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
For a comprenehnsive introduction about this point and its implication to the Humanities, see Souroujon 2015.
May be unnecessary to say, may be important, that I am here (and were also in Simão 2016b) in the phenomenological field of Heidegger’s Ontology- The Hermeneutics of Facticity (1923) and Being and Time (1927), and not in the phenomenological field of his later formulations in Introduction to Metaphysics (1935). For a comprehensive and critic view of these two Heideggers, so to speak, see Wild (1963).
References
Boesch, E. E. (1991). Symbolic action theory and cultural psychology. Berlin/ Heidelberg/ New York: Springer.
Boesch, E. E. (1996) The seven flaws of cross-cultural psychology – The story of a conversion. Mind, Culture and Activity, 3(1). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum, 2-10.
Boesch, E. E. (2000). The myth of lurking chaos. In H. Keller, Y. Poortinga, & A. Schölmerich (Eds.), Between biology and culture: Perspectives on ontogenetic development (pp. 116–135). Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.
Boesch, E. E. (2008). On subjective culture: In response to Carlos Cornejo. Culture & Psychology, 14(4), 498–512.
Eckensberger, L. (1997). The legacy of Boesch’s intellectual oeuvre. Culture & Psychology, 3(3), 277–298.
Heidegger, M. (1923/1999). Ontology- the hermeneutics of facticity. Indiana: Indiana University Press.
Heidegger, M. (1927/ 1996). Being and Time. New York: State of New York Univ. Press (Translated by Joan Stambaugh).
Klempe, S. H. (2016). A philosophical vs. a psychological perspective on Borders. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 50, 77–90.
Marsico, G. (2011). The “non-cuttable” space in between: Context, boundaries and their natural fluidity. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 45, 185–193.
Marsico, G., Cabell, K. R., Valsiner, J., & Kharlamov, N. A. (2013). Interobjectivity as a border: The fluid dynamics of “Betweenness”. In G. Sammut, P. Daanen, & F. Moghaddam (Eds.), Understanding the self and others: Explorations in intersubjectivity and interobjectivity (pp. 51–65). London: Routledge.
Nunes, B. (2020/2002) Passagem para o Poético - Filosofia e Poesia em Heidegger. São Paulo: Loyola.
Perez-Campos’ (2017). Ontological issues and the possible development of cultural psychology. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Sciences, doi:10.1007/s12124-017-9379-5.
Sheehan, T. (2001). A Paradigm Shift in Heidegger Research. Continental Philosophy Review, 32(2), 1–20.
Simão, L. M. (2002). A Noção de Objeto e a Concepção de Sujeito em Boesch. In L. M. Simão, M. T. C. C. de Souza, & N. E. Coelho Jr. (Eds.), Noção de Objeto, Concepção de Sujeito: Freud, Piaget e Boesch (pp. 87–116). Casa do Psicólogo: São Paulo.
Simão, L. M. (2003). Beside Rupture - disquiet. Beyond the other - alterity, Culture & Psychology, 9, 449–459.
Simão, L. M. (2008). Ernst E. Boesch’s holistic cultural psychology. In R. Diriwachter & J. Valsiner (Eds.), Striving for the whole- creating theoretical syntheses (pp. 131–150). New Brunswick: Transaction Pub.
Simão, L. M. (2012). The other in the self: A triadic unit. In J. Valsiner (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of culture and psychology (pp. 403–420). New York: Oxford University Press.
Simão, L. M. (2016a). Culture as a moving symbolic border. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 50, 14–28.
Simão, L. M. (2016b). Ersnt E. Boesch’s Ontologic predication in focus. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 50, 568–585.
Souroujon, G. (2015). La Propuesta Hermenéutica de Charles Taylor. Una Crítica a la Epistemología Dominante en la Ciencia Política. Athenea Digital, 15(1), 270–286.
Strawson, P.F. (1990). Kant's paralogisms: Self-consciousness and the "Outside Observer". In: H. Cramer et al. (Eds.) Theorie der Subjektivität. Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp.
Sykes, K. (2010). Ontology is just another word for culture - against the motion. In Venkatesan, S. (Ed.) ontology is just another word for culture. Critique of Anthropology, 30(2), 168–172.
Taylor, C. (2006). Merleau-Ponty and the epistemological picture. In T. Carman & M. Hansen (Eds.), The Cambridge companion to Merleau-Ponty (pp. 26–49). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Valsiner, J. (1989). Human development and culture. Lexington: Lexington Books.
Valsiner, J. (1998). The guided mind: A sociogenetic approach to personality. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Valsiner, J. (2007). Culture in minds and societies: Foundations of cultural psychology. New Delhi: Sage.
Valsiner, J. (2013). An invitation to cultural psychology. London: SAGE.
Wheeler, M. (2016) Martin Heidegger, The Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy (winter 2016 edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2016/entries/heidegger/>.
Wild, J. (1963). The philosophy of Martin Heidegger. The Journal of Philosophy, 60(22), 664–677.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Human Studies and Participants
This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by the author.
Funding
No funding was received for this work.
Conflict of Interest
The author declares no conflict of interest.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Simão, L.M. Once More about Boesch’s Ontological Predication in Focus. Integr. psych. behav. 51, 670–679 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-017-9396-4
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-017-9396-4