Where is psychology going? Structural fault lines revealed by psychologists' use of Kuhn.
- 1 January 2003
- journal article
- Published by American Psychological Association (APA) in American Psychologist
- Vol. 58 (4) , 269-278
- https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066x.58.4.269
Abstract
Psychologists' appropriation of language and ideas from Thomas Kuhn's (1962, 1970b) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions reveals deep and contradictory concerns about truth, science, and the progress of the field. The author argues that psychologists, uncomfortably straddling natural and social science traditions, reference Structure for 2 reasons largely overlooked: first, because it presents an intermediate, naturalistic position in the war between relativist and rationalist views of scientific truth, and second, because it presents a psychologized model of scientific change. The author suggests that the history of this mutual influence--psychologists being influenced by Kuhn and vice versa--may usefully inform current practices of psychological science.Keywords
This publication has 52 references indexed in Scilit:
- Why We Should Bring About a Crisis in PsychologyJournal of Social Distress and Homelessness, 1996
- How Many New Discoveries Do We Need to Avoid a Crisis in Psychology?Journal of Social Distress and Homelessness, 1996
- Where Is the Crisis in Psychology?Journal of Social Distress and Homelessness, 1996
- The Crisis in PsychologyJournal of Social Distress and Homelessness, 1996
- The spell of Kuhn on psychology: An exegetical elixirPhilosophical Psychology, 1993
- "The Historical Meaning of the Crisis in Psychology"Soviet Psychology, 1991
- Can “mind” and behavior be understood without understanding the brain?: A response to BungeNew Ideas in Psychology, 1990
- The Paradigm Plague: Prevention, Cure, and InoculationHuman Relations, 1990
- The structure of psychological revolutionsJournal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 1978
- Psychology's first paradigmJournal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 1977