OpenLB
Open Library of Bioscience
Advanced Search
Integrative psychological & behavioral science
09, 2020;54 (3): 563-571.

Psychology Today: Still in Denial, Still Outdated.

Aaro Toomela
Author Information
  1. Aaro Toomela: School of Natural Sciences and Health, Tallinn University, Narva Rd 29, 10120, Tallinn, Estonia. aaro.toomela@ut.ee.
PMID: 32363525 DOI: 10.1007/s12124-020-09534-3

Abstract

The questionable state of psychology as a science has been pointed out repeatedly over last hundred years. Sometimes programs to overcome the obvious limitations of psychology have been also proposed. So far, in vain. Zagaria with coauthors (this issue) bring the subject up again. They demonstrate that psychology today is characterized by the incoherence of definitions of core constructs and lack of consensus in the scientific community. The authors also suggest that psychology would do better by adopting a research program of a specific form of evolutionary psychology. In this paper I show, mostly on the basis of my earlier works on the same subject, that shortcomings of psychology today go much deeper than the authors of the target article have discussed. Psychology today is characterized by fundamental epistemological and methodological problems. As the same shortcomings characterize the version of evolutionary psychology advocated by Zagaria and coauthors, it is not the best candidate to ground the future of psychology. I suggest the psychology misses unifying psychology of a specific kind, which basic principles were outlined by Vygotsky almost a century ago.

Keywords

Epistemology Methodology Paradigm Psychology Unifying theory

References

  1. Bertone, G., & Tait, T. M. P. (2018). A new era in the search for dark matter. Nature,562, 51–56. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-018-0542-z [DOI: 10.1038/s41586-018-0542-z]
  2. Buss, D. M. (2019). Evolutionary psychology. The new science of the mind. Sixth edition. New York: Routledge. [DOI: 10.4324/9780429061417]
  3. Gerstein, M. B., Bruce, C., Rozowsky, J. S., Zheng, D., Du, J., Korbel, J. O., & Snyder, M. (2007). What is a gene, post-ENCODE? History and updated definition. Genome Research,17, 669–681. https://doi.org/10.1101/gr.6339607 [DOI: 10.1101/gr.6339607]
  4. Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions (2 edn, Enlarged). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
  5. Lewin, K. (1997a). Constructs in field theory. (Originally published in 1944). In K. Lewin (Ed.), Resolving social conflicts and field theory in social science (pp. 191–199). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. [DOI: 10.1037/10269-014]
  6. Lewin, K. (1997b). Formalization and progress in psychology. (Originally published in 1940). In K. Lewin (Ed.), Resolving social conflicts and field theory in social science (pp. 169–190). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. [DOI: 10.1037/10269-000]
  7. Ma, W. (2016). The essence of life. Biology Direct,11(49), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13062-016-0150-5 [DOI: 10.1186/s13062-016-0150-5]
  8. Mariscal, C., & Fleming, L. (2018). Why we should care about univeral biology. Biological Theory,13, 121–130. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13752-017-0280-8 [DOI: 10.1007/s13752-017-0280-8]
  9. Popa, R. (2004). Between necessity and probability: Searching for the definition and origin of life. Berlin: Springer.
  10. Portin, P., & Wilkins, A. (2017). The evolving definition of the term “gene". Genetics,205(4), 1353–1364. https://doi.org/10.1534/genetics.116.196956 [DOI: 10.1534/genetics.116.196956]
  11. Siegel, D. J. (2016). Mind. A journey to the heart of being human. New York: W. W. Norton.
  12. Simpson, J. A., & Campbell, L. (2016). Methods of evolutionary sciences. In D. M. Buss (Ed.), The handbook of evolutionary psychology. Second edition. Volume 1: Foundations (pp. 115–135). Hoboken: Wiley.
  13. Toomela, A. (2007a). 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 [DOI: 10.1007/s12124-007-9004-0]
  14. Toomela, A. (2007b). History of methodology in psychology: Starting point, not the goal. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science,41(1), 75–82. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-007-9005-z [DOI: 10.1007/s12124-007-9005-z]
  15. Toomela, A. (2007c). Unifying psychology: absolutely necessary, not only useful. In A. V. B. Bastos & N. M. D. Rocha (Eds.), Psicologia: Novas direcoes no dialogo com outros campos de saber (pp. 449–464). Sao Paulo: Casa do Psicologo.
  16. Toomela, A. (2008a). Activity theory is a dead end for methodological thinking in cultural psychology too. Culture and Psychology,14(3), 289–303. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354067X08088558 [DOI: 10.1177/1354067X08088558]
  17. Toomela, A. (2008b). 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 [DOI: 10.1007/s12124-008-9059-6]
  18. Toomela, A. (2009a). 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: Springer. [DOI: 10.1007/978-0-387-95922-1_3]
  19. Toomela, A. (2009b). Kurt Lewin’s contribution to the methodology of psychology: From past to future skipping the present. In J. Clegg (Ed.), The Observation of Human Systems. Lessons from the History of Anti-Reductionistic Empirical Psychology (pp. 101–116). New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.
  20. Toomela, A., & Valsiner, J. (Eds.). (2010). Methodological Thinking in Psychology: 60 Years Gone Astray? Charlotte: Information Age Publishing.
  21. Toomela, A. (2010a). Poverty of modern mainstream psychology in autobiography. Reflections on A History of Psychology in Autobiography, Volume IX. Culture and Psychology,16(1), 127–144. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354067X09344892 [DOI: 10.1177/1354067X09344892]
  22. Toomela, A. (2010b). Quantitative methods in psychology: Inevitable and useless. Frontiers in Psychology,1(29), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2010.00029 [DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2010.00029]
  23. 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 [DOI: 10.1007/s12124-010-9152-5]
  24. Toomela, A. (2012). Guesses on the future of cultural psychology: Past, present, and past. In J. Valsiner (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Culture and Psychology (pp. 998–1033). New York: Oxford University Press.
  25. Toomela, A. (2014a). Mainstream psychology. In T. Teo (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Critical Psychology (pp. 1117–1125). New York: Springer. [DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4614-5583-7_667]
  26. Toomela, A. (2014b). Methodology of cultural-historical psychology. In A. Yasnitsky, R. van der Veer & M. Ferrari (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Cultural-Historical Psychology (pp. 99–125). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  27. Toomela, A. (2014c). A structural systemic theory of causality and catalysis. In K. R. Cabell & J. Valsiner (Eds.), The catalyzing mind. Beyond models of causality (pp. 271–292). New York: Springer. [DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4614-8821-7_15]
  28. Toomela, A. (2014d). There can be no cultural-historical psychology without neuropsychology. And vice versa. In A. Yasnitsky, R. van der Veer & M. Ferrari (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Cultural-Historical Psychology (pp. 315–349). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [DOI: 10.1017/CBO9781139028097.019]
  29. Toomela, A. (2015a). Towards understanding biotic, psychic and semiotically-mediated mechanisms of anticipation. In M. Nadin (Ed.), Anticipation: Learning from the past (pp. 431–455). Cham: Springer. [DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-19446-2_26]
  30. Toomela, A. (2015b). Vygotsky’s theory on the Procrustes’ bed of linear thinking: Looking for structural-systemic Theseus to save the idea of ‘social formation of mind.’ Culture and Psychology,21(3), 318–339. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354067X15570490
  31. Toomela, A. (2016a). Kultuur, kõne ja Minu Ise. (Culture, speech, and My Self). Tallinn: Eesti Keele Sihtasutus.
  32. Toomela, A. (2016b). Six meanings of the history of science: The case of psychology. In S. H. Klempe & R. Smith (Eds.), Centrality of history for theory construction in psychology (pp. 47–73). Cham: Springer. [DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-42760-7_3]
  33. Toomela, A. (2016c). The ways of scientific anticipation: from guesses to probabilities and from there to certainty. In M. Nadin (Ed.), Anticipation across disciplines (pp. 255–273). Cham: Springer. [DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-22599-9_16]
  34. Toomela, A. (2017a). Minu Ise areng: inimlapsest Inimeseks. (Development of My Self: From the human child to the Human.). Tartu: Väike Vanker.
  35. Toomela, A. (2017b). Neuroscience: Can it become developmental? In D. Carre, J. Valsiner & S. Hampl (Eds.), Representing development: The social construction of models of change (pp. 107–120). London: Routledge.
  36. Toomela, A. (2017c). Towards general-unifying theory of psychology: Engelsted and beyond. In N. Engelsted (Ed.), Catching up with Aristotle. A journey in quest for general psychology (pp. 137–150). Cham: Springer.
  37. Toomela, A. (2018). Vygotskian (but only partly Vygotsky’s) understanding of special education. Educacao: Revista Quadrimestral. Porto Alegre,41(3), 347–361. https://doi.org/10.15448/1981-2582.2018.3.31795 [DOI: 10.15448/1981-2582.2018.3.31795]
  38. Toomela, A. (2019). The Psychology of Scientific Inquiry. Cham: Springer Nature. [DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-31449-1]
  39. Trifonov, E. N. (2011). Vocabulary of definitions of life suggests a definition. Journal of Biomolecular Structure and Dynamics,29(2), 259–266. https://doi.org/10.1080/073911011010524992 [DOI: 10.1080/073911011010524992]
  40. 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.
  41. Vygotsky, L. S. (1982b). Psikhologija i uchenije o lokalizacii psikhicheskih funktcii. (Originally written in 1934). In A. R. Luria & M. G. Jaroshevskii (Eds.), L. S. Vygotsky. Sobranije sochinenii. Tom 1. Voprosy teorii i istorii psikhologii (pp. 168–174). Moscow: Pedagogika.
  42. Zagaria, A., Ando, A., & Zennaro, A. (2020). Psychology: A giant with feet of clay. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science.

Grants

  1. Grant Study of novel aspects of the state and development of speech function./Tallinn University School of Natural Sciences and Health

MeSH Term

Biological Evolution
Clay
Humans
Knowledge

Chemicals

Clay
Journal Article Comment
Article has an altmetric score of 18

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0psychologytodayPsychologyalsoZagariacoauthorssubjectcharacterizedauthorssuggestspecificevolutionaryshortcomingsStillquestionablestatesciencepointedrepeatedlylasthundredyearsSometimesprogramsovercomeobviouslimitationsproposedfarvainissuebringdemonstrateincoherencedefinitionscoreconstructslackconsensusscientificcommunitybetteradoptingresearchprogramformpapershowmostlybasisearlierworksgomuchdeepertargetarticlediscussedfundamentalepistemologicalmethodologicalproblemscharacterizeversionadvocatedbestcandidategroundfuturemissesunifyingkindbasicprinciplesoutlinedVygotskyalmostcenturyagoToday:DenialOutdatedEpistemologyMethodologyParadigmUnifyingtheory

Similar Articles

Cited By (2)