Could Presentism in the Histories of Psychology Actually be Futuristic?

Disputes about the origins of psychology in the history of the discipline are functional not for our understanding of the past, but as normative signs that regulate the construction of ideas in the future. We introduce the notion of open-ended normativity that regulates the development of a given discipline towards its future. Hence the question of the cultural origins of psychology becomes contested in the 21st century as an important topic. It proves that the history of psychology is an active participant in the making of psychology, as it is creating its future.     

Comments on “the measurement of factorial indeterminacy”

Guttman's index of indeterminacy (2² – 1) measures the potential amount of uncertainty in picking the right alternative interpretation for a factor. When alternative solutions for a factor are equally likely to be correct, then the squared multiple correlation ² for predicting the factor from the observed variables is the average correlation _AB between independently selected alternative solutionsA andB, while var ( _AB )=(1 – ²)²/s, wheres is the dimensionality of the space in which unpredicted components of alternative solutions are to be found. When alternative solutions for the factor are not equally likely to be chosen, ² is the lower bound for E( _AB ); however, E( _AB ) need not be a modal value in the distribution of _AB . Guttman's index and E( _AB ) measure different aspects of the same indeterminacy problem.     

Sources of History for “A Psychology of Verbal Communication”

There is a standard version of the history of modern mainstream psycholinguistics that emphasizes an extraordinary explosion of research in mid twentieth century under the guidance and leadership of George A. Miller and Noam Chomsky. The narrative is cast as a dramatic shift away from behavioristic principles and toward mentalistic principles based largely on transformational linguistics. A closer view of the literature diminishes the historical importance of behaviorism, shows a prevailing “written language bias” (Linell in The written language bias in linguistics: Its nature, origins and transformations, Routledge, London, 2005, p. 4) in psycholinguistic research, and elevates some theoretical and empirical thinking of the late nineteenth and the early twentieth centuries on language and language use to a far more important role than has heretofore been acknowledged. In keeping with the theoretical and methodological perspective of the present article, it is particularly appropriate that the German philologist Philipp Wegener be “given his due in the annals of linguistic sciences” (Koerner 1991, p. VI*). In his (1885/1991) Untersuchungen über die Grundfragen des Sprachlebens (Investigations regarding the fundamental questions of the life of language; our translation), he began his philological research with the investigation of actual speaking in everyday settings rather than with analyses of purely formal structure. Moreover, he emphasized understanding language and localized this function in the listener. Compatible with Wegener’s own investigations is another aspect of speaking that has been most seriously neglected throughout the history of research on the psychology of verbal communication. For him, as well as for Esper (In C. Murchison [Ed.], A handbook of social psychology, Clark University Press, Worchester, MA, 1935), the basic and primary genre of dialogical discourse was not ongoing conversation, but the occasional use of speech in association with other activities. Both Bühler (Sprachtheorie, Fischer, Stuttgart, 1934/1982) and Wittgenstein (Philosophische Untersuchungen/Philosophical investigations, Basil Blackwell, Oxford, 1958) have also emphasized the importance of the genre of occasional speaking. The article concludes with a discussion of historical shifts in the relationship between psychology and linguistics.     

Between Dolev and Dummett: Some Comments on ‘Antirealism,Presentism and Bivalence’

Abstract

It is well known that, according to some, philosophical reflection on zombies (i.e. bodies without minds) poses a problem for physicalism. But what about ghosts, i.e., minds without bodies? Does philosophical reflection on them pose a problem for physicalism? Descartes, of course, thought so, and lately rumours have been surfacing that has was right after all, that ghosts pose a problem for both a priori and a posteriori physicalism, and for any kind of physicalism in between. This paper argues that physicalists have nothing to fear from ghosts, since the central consideration employed to motivate ghostly arguments against physicalism – i.e. that ghosts are conceivable – is false: ghosts aren’t conceivable.     

Comments on the “lens model” equation and the analysis of multiple-cue judgment tasks

It is the purpose of this paper to discuss the ‘Lens Model’ approach to the analysis of subject performance in multiple-cue judgment tasks embedded in probabilistic environments. Various characteristics of the linear lens model are presented in matrix notation and are formulated without reference to standardized variables in order to facilitate analysis and subsequent generalization. Some new results on ‘matching’ behavior are presented. A brief outline of current problems and related work is presented. This research was supported by National Institute of Health grant No. MH-16817.     

Kierkegaard and Psychology as the Science of the “Multifarious Life”

The aim of this paper is to demonstrate the actuality of some considerations around psychology made by the Danish philosopher Søren Kierkegaard (1813–1855). According to him psychology is about the “multifarious” life, which is a term that pinpoints the challenges psychology still have when it comes to including changes and genetic perspectives on its understanding of actual living. Yet Kierkegaard discusses psychology in relationship to metaphysics, which is an almost forgotten perspective. His understanding opens up for narrowing the definition of psychology down to the science of subjectivity, which at the same time elevates psychology to being the only science that focuses on the actual human life. Yet Kierkegaard’s most important contribution to psychology is to maintain a radical distinction between subjectivity and objectivity, and in this respect the psychology of today is challenged.     

A Commentary on “Positive Psychology and Indian Psychology: In Need of Mutual Reinforcement”

For those who consider Indian Psychology (IP) a cause worthy of support, comparing IP with Positive Psychology (PP) is a compelling, but at first sight rather embarrassing exercise. Though these two approaches to psychology started roughly at the same time with similar-looking intentions, PP has made by now a major impact in terms of published papers, books and “name recognition”, while IP is still no more than a fringe phenomenon that is hardly on the map, even in India. K. Ramakrishna Rao’s analysis of the situation is as always impressive, but alternative perspectives are possible. To start, I agree of course with Prof. Ramakrishna Rao that these two new schools of psychology are similar in their intent of bringing some more “goodness” into mainstream psychology, but in my humble opinion, their similarity ends there. PP is a simple attempt at correcting mainstream psychology’s tendency to focus primarily on difficulties and negative emotional states. Beyond that, it doesn’t challenge the mainstream in any way. In spite of a not very successful attempt at internationalising itself (for an excellent critique see Christopher & Hickinbottom, 2008), it is still solidly American, and as a whole it fits perfectly and noiselessly within the existing discipline and its supporting culture.     

Psychology and democracy in the name of God? The invocation of modern and secular discourses on parenting in the service of conservative religious aims

This article analyses an insular religious community's guidance literature on parenting which adopts aspects of the democratic and the psychological discourses commonly accepted to be Western, modern and secular in character. I argue here that due to its social structure as a religious enclave, the Haredi community stresses the equality of its members. When the surrounding community becomes more egalitarian the Haredi community is forced to increase its internal equality in order to prevent defection of its members and as part of this effort it incorporates democratic discourses and practices from the outside. Some of these relate to the relations between children and their parents and educators. As I will show, the loss of authority of elders, as part of this process, forces Haredi rabbis and educators to incorporate Western psychological discourse as an alternative means of social control. Through this examination of Haredi guidance literature on parenting, the article explores which aspects of those discourses are rejected and which are adopted and why. It also considers the broader meanings and implications of this process.     

Discursive Psychology and the “New Racism”

This paper addresses a range of theoretical issues which are the topic of recent social psychological and related research concerned with the “new racism.” We critically examine examples of such research in order to explore how analyst concerns with anti-racist political activism are surreptitiously privileged in explanations of social interaction, often at the expense of and in preference to the work of examining participants' own formulations of those same activities. Such work is contrasted with an ethnomethodologically-informed, discursive psychology which seeks to the explore how participants' talk is responsively oriented to foreclosing the same sort of critique implicitly made available in new racism research as a way for speakers to account for their own and others' activities within the controversy which that same body of research seeks to settle. More specifically, we examine how the rhetorical context of controversy surrounding race and racism is imminent to the situated activities whereby speakers provide for its relevance and not, as assumed in new racism research, some independent factor affecting that interaction. Finally, we conclude with an analysis of an episode of talk recorded in a social science interview having as its topic the nature of cross-cultural contact in which the participants take up the issue of racism as a way of managing the conflicting demands with which they are confronted in accounting for their involvement as Western expatriates living in the Middle East. Throughout our analysis of these materials, the issue of racism is approached for how it features as a participant concern, raised by speakers in the course of attending to the immediate situated interactional business in which they are engaged. This revised version was published online in July 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

Comments on “Intra- and interspecific variation in self-control capacities of parrots in a delay of gratification task”

Animal Cognition - Brucks (Anim Cogn 25(2):473–491, 2021) have published an intriguing paper on the differing abilities of various species of parrots to succeed in a delay of gratification...