当前俄罗斯维果茨基心理学思想研究的现状

当前俄罗斯维果茨基心理学思想研究的现状表现为：(1)对维果茨基心理学遗产的整理出版及其现代意义的研究;(2)维果茨基心理学思想发展阶段与维果茨基概念的逻辑结构研究;(3)对维果茨基心理学思想的发展;(4)俄罗斯心理学界对维果茨基及化历史心理学的批评。作认为,在当前俄罗斯对维果茨基的研究远不及西方“维果茨基热”有其重要的原因：当前俄罗斯的社会现实因素;西方维果茨基热是由于西方心理学自身的缺陷;与现代西方心理学的化转向有关。     

国内心理学文化思维问题反思

深受西方影响的非西方国家民众的文化失落感已成为根植于理智阶层心底的一种难以排遣的情结,为本民族、本地域的心理学取得合理与合法身份或地位,成为他们必须面对的现实问题.随之而来的难题在于文化思维与现代性二元对立方法论的偏狭性.破解这一难题关键在于文化思维与方法论的转向,从对心理学向本土文化寻求外在的支持转向在文化框架下对心理学本身的文化性格考察,从而辨明本土心理学与文化之间真正关联.     

论心理学发展的困境与出路

近年来西方心理学家对心理学发展取向提出强烈批评。综合各家所论,心理学以往发展的困境乃是由于：(1)自哲学心理学到科学心理学对人性解释的理论始终纷歧,以致无法形成常规科学条件;(2)科学心理学自始即标榜自然科学而缺独立意识;(3)强调科学方法,忽视人性特质而陷入削足适履困境。因此,今后国内心理学的发展势不能再全盘西化,而应在人性特质与本土文化基础上吸取西方心理学精义,针对国人心理特质研究发展出属於自己的理论与应用心理学。本文最后提出的四会能力教学构想,希望对本土文化取向应用心理学的研究发挥一点抛砖引玉作用。     

当代心理学文化转向的方法论意义

当代心理学的文化转向关注人的心理与行为的文化特性,揭示文化与人的心理发展的相互关系,为理解人类行为提供了一种新的视野。文化转向带来了心理学研究中文化的回归,全面而深刻地影响了心理学的方法论思想,揭开了心理学文化性质的神秘面纱,促进了心理学研究中多元取向的综合与多元方法的整合。     

当代心理学文化转向方法论问题

心理学文化转向的魅力在于为学界提供了研究与审视心理学与文化之间关系新视角,但随之而来的难题在于研究思维和方法论现代性二元对立的无法超越性.它所带给心理学界的困惑远大于它自身拥有的魅力.破解这一难题关键在于思维方式的转向,从对心理学向文化寻求外在的支持转向对心理学本身的文化品性的探新,从关注外在于人的文化或外在于文化的人转向对心理学与文化之间的关联和互动层面.这种思维转向就是提出心理学文化品性探新.     

语言转向和西方心理学理论和研究的深入发展

语言转向是西方哲学自我批判的产物,对西方心理学摆脱“康德式难题”具有重要意义。该文以西方哲学语言转向的内在逻辑为理论背景,分析了由此引发的西方心理学研究主题、线索和路径变迁。分析哲学、解释学和结构主义是语言转向的三种方式,共同实现了20世纪的语言转向,影响心理学理论和研究的变迁,推动心理学关注语言建构和文本陈述,激发新的心理学理论和研究。     

心理障碍的文化建构--健康心理学发展中的新趋向

西方心理学发展过程中的文化转向使得文化在心理障碍建构中的作用日益突出,主要表现为:象征功能、建构功能、指导功能和唤起功能。相应地,文化对于心理障碍的建构主要通过文化基础的主观经验、悲伤惯用语、诊断、治疗和结果来进行。此种建构方式将促使心理障碍的诊断和治疗走出传统的疾病中心治疗范式,更加关注人文因素的强大作用。     

当代心理学文化兴起方法论困境与路向

今天的科学心理学执意于自然科学研究品格,试图将心理学创建成为有着与自然科学同样品质的学科门类,从而陷入科学与非科学之争的“康德式难题”尴尬境地。心理学文化兴起为学界提供了研究心理学与文化之间关系的新视角。但是,由于思维方式和方法论二元对立的局限性。使心理学走进了难以超越的困境。心理学文化兴起新路向在于思维方式的转向,从关注外在于人的文化或外在于文化的人转向对人的心理与文化之间的关联和互动层面。     

西方哲学心智转向对心理学的影响

心智哲学是20世纪中末期西方哲学所发生的继语言(义)学转向和语用学转向之后的一次重要转向,它为心理学提供了新的元理论和方法论。(1)为心理学提供了"心智-语言-世界"新的世界观;(2)从哲学角度对人的心理进行了探讨,促进了哲学与心理学的结合并互哺;(3)促使人们对"人是什么"重新审视与理解;(4)引发了对以往心理学尤其是主流心理学的基石——身心二元论的质疑;(5)催生了第二代认知科学、活动主义、情境认知等新取向的兴起。它对心理学有很大启示:第一,人工智能、动物研究等研究是有限度的;第二,应重视身体的作用;第三,应重视人的意向性,注重隐喻分析;第四,应关注人的存在,尤其是生命的意义。     

后现代主义与心理学中的社会治疗理论

后现代主义作为一种社会思潮对社会科学的方方面面都产生了很大的影响 ,掀起了一次社会科学的“后现代”转向。心理学中的社会心理治疗理论就是这种变化趋势的一个明显体现。以后现代的视角重塑了传统心理治疗理论 ,由以往对个体的过分关注转向了对广泛的文化、历史方面的关注。从而成为后现代思潮中影响重大的理论流派之一。1　后现代主义的特征后现代主义是 2 0世纪末西方具有重大影响的文化思潮。后现代思潮是对“现代”西方文化精神和价值取向的一次重要变革 ,是对现代的主流科学认识观的怀疑 ,特别是对长期主导自然科学和社会科学的实…     

A philosophical reflection on the epistemology and methodology of indigenous psychologies

In order to answer the three crucial questions (why, what and how) about the development of indigenous psychology, three levels of breakthrough need to be made, namely, philosophical reflection, theoretical construction and empirical research. The controversial issues that have occurred in the earlier development of indigenous psychology are analyzed in terms of the switch in Western philosophy of science from positivism to post-positivism. Based on this analysis, it is argued that indigenous psychologists should construct formal theories illustrating the functioning of the human mind that may be applicable to various cultures, and then use these theories to study the particular mentalities of people in a given culture with the scientific methods of empirical research.     

Philosophy of psychology at the turn of the century

The philosophy of psychology at the turn of the century was an amalgam of perspectives and commitments--experimental science, Darwinian theory, positivism--forged partly out of achievements in experimental science and partly in response to transcendentalist (Hegelian) challenges. The amalgam itself appeared as an early version of the positivism that became developed and dominant early in the 20th century. For many psychologists at the turn of the century, experimental science, as practiced chiefly in physics and chemistry, was tantamount to a philosophy of science and one stripped of what were taken to be distracting and useless metaphysical quibbles. The assets and liabilities of this allegiance were recognized even as it was forming.     

知识划界、追赶焦虑与中国本土心理学的理论建构导向

科学心理学以方法为中心的知识建构策略,内在地要求它与常识心理学划界以谋求自然科学分支的学科地位,其代价是对人类心理之情感与意义维度的隔离。在移植西方心理学体系的过程中,科学心理学的争议也内含于中国心理学的发展轨迹中,同时还附加了学术边陲地区特有的学科追赶焦虑。中国本土心理学理论应突破科学至上的观念束缚,致力于发展具有现实解释力和价值引导力的人文主义导向的心理学理论,以切实解决中国现实社会中的心理问题,并在世界心理学界发出真正的中国声音。     

The sociocultural movement in psychology,the role of theories in sociocultural inquiries,and the theory of sociocultural models

This special issue presents the theory of sociocultural models (TSCM) and its applications in diverse areas of psychology, including education, health care, clinical practice, gender relations, and general research. As many theories already exist in the social sciences, some readers may ask: “Why do cross‐cultural, cultural, and indigenous psychologists need another theory?” This question is comprised of two aspects: culture/cultural and theory/theoretical. Therefore, to answer it, it is important to clarify both issues. The first relates to cultural and its relation to psychological. The second, theory, considers its relation to cultural and psychological. These issues have long‐range implications for all culture and psychology disciplines as they pose many questions: What role does culture play in the mental functioning of people? How is culture constituted? Is cultural related to social? Does people’s mental functioning exert reciprocal influences on their cultural and social functioning? While working toward answering these questions, researchers quickly determine that more questions arise: What role should theories play in answering these questions? What constitutes theory in culture and psychology disciplines? How should such a theory (or such theories) address the triad of cultural, social, and mental? Consequently, in an effort to provide an overview of the TSCM and to begin to answer these questions, this introduction consists of two parts. The first part addresses the sociocultural turn in modern psychology; this part discusses its implications for research in culture and psychology disciplines. The second segment examines the topic of the theoretical backgrounds of cultural and cross‐cultural research and connects the philosophical paradigms of interpretivism and realism with the theory of sociocultural models. This introduction concludes with a brief overview of the articles included in this issue.     

心理学研究本土文化取向的理论与实践

经由本地化研究建立本土心理学的呼声,自20世纪80年代以来,在两岸三地即已时有所闻．惟对“本土”或“本地化”的概念并不明确。到90年代末期台湾部分心理学家提出三地论的概念^[3],认为港、台、大陆三地因长期隔离,社会形态各异,故而主张三地华人社会的心理学者应各自建立自己的本土心理学(台湾本土心理学、大陆本土心理学、香港本土心理学)。此种纯以地区为前提的心理学研究取向有待商榷．原因是如将心理学视为研究人性特质的科学。并将心理与行为视为人性特质的表徽。显而易见的是,影响心理与行为的文化因素大于地区因素。基于此义．本文提出采用心理学研究本土文化取向的建议．并试从心理学思想的演变中分析探讨此一建议的合理性。一得之愚尚请学界先进批评指教。     

The psychology of practice and the practice of the three psychologies

The keynote speakers at the 2nd Asian Association for Social Psychology Meetings were asked to clarify the relationship among the three scholarly fields known as cultural psychology, indigenous psychology and cross‐cultural psychology. Are they three names for the same thing? If not are they complementary or antagonistic enterprises? Does one approach subsume the other(s) or make the other(s) possible? What follows is my own general view of the “three psychologies” issue. I suggest that cultural psychology and indigenous psychology are kindred approaches, which differ in significant ways from cross‐cultural psychology. A distinction is drawn between the study of “mentalities” (the proper unit of analysis for cultural and indigenous psychology) and the study of “mind” (a non‐cultural phenomenon). Cultural psychology is a type of interpretive analysis of social practice which asks, “what are the `goals, values and pictures of the world' with reference to which this behavior might be seen as rational?” The essay describes the assumption of rationality and the place of cultural critique in interpretive analysis. Is there any significant difference at all between cultural psychology and indigenous psychology? One aim of cultural psychology (“globalizing the local”) is premised on the view that “indigenous psychologies” may have relevance outside their points of origin. How open is the indigenous psychology movement to the idea that (e.g.) a psychology with a “Chinese soul” might illuminate the psychological functioning of members of non‐Chinese populations?     

建立儒家人文主义的学术传统:由文化“复建”到文化“复兴”

本文回顾了作者跟随杨国枢教授推动本土心理学的学术历程,并依据自己的切身体会,提出本土心理学运动必须以科学哲学作为基础。作者身体力行,在最近二三十年间,深入学习科学哲学的理论,逐步建立本土心理学的相关理论。其最终目标,是打算以儒家文化作为基底,吸纳西方近代文明的菁华,“中学为体,西学为用”,摆脱西方学术的宰制,建立“儒家人文主义”的自主学术传统。作者认为,唯有大力发展本土社会科学,建立华人“自主的社会科学传统”,华人学术社群才有可能走出“学术自我殖民”的心态。     

Laudan's normative naturalism: a useful philosophy of science for psychology

Logical positivism, widely regarded as the received epistemology of psychology in the first half of the 20th century, was supplanted in the 1960s by various postpositivistic, relativistic philosophies of science, most notably that of Kuhn. Recently, Laudan, a major figure in the philosophy of science, developed a novel approach called normative naturalism that provides an alternative to positivism and relativism. His central thesis is that the two are not always on opposite ends of a continuum but rather have many assumptions in common. This article brings Laudan's important views to the attention of psychologists and describes some of the unique implications of these views for the conduct of research and theory in psychology. These implications, which follow from a number of closely reasoned pragmatic arguments, include more realistic and appropriate evaluation of theory and methodology than has been suggested by logical positivism or relativism.     

Neoscholastic psychology revisited

Beginning around 1879, a Neoscholastic psychology developed, an experimental psychology with a soul. Opposed to materialism, it sought to renew Scholastic philosophy by incorporating the findings of the natural sciences. Neoscholastic psychology is an important chapter in the history of the relationships between science and religion in the 20th century. Neoscholastic psychology was both experimental and philosophical. This article presents the main accomplishments of North American Neoscholastic psychology in academic and applied areas. Neoscholastic psychologists championed scientific psychology while insisting on a better conception of human nature. Philosophical critiques led to a decline of Neoscholasticism; after the 1960s it was no longer official Catholic philosophy. Neoscholasticism gave psychologists concerned with philosophical questions impetus to turn to phenomenology, existentialism, and humanistic psychology.