Commentators have criticized psychology's overemphasis on method and its
simultaneous neglect of questions regarding the subject matter and purpose of
psychology. This article summarizes four problems that have resulted from the
privileging of method, and in each case illustrates how an explicit ontology
provides at least partial solutions to these problems. This article also suggests
three metatheoretical assumptions based on the thinking of William James that would
allow for the establishment of an explicit ontology and that would allow for
psychological entities per se to be studied without the threat of biological or
other kinds of reductionism. Finally, concerns that may arise in the formation of an
explicit ontology are briefly addressed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bakan, D.
(1967). Idolatry in religion and science. On
method: Toward a reconstruction of psychological investigation (pp.
150-159). San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
2.
Bakan, D.
(1972, March). Psychology can now kick the science habit. Psychology Today, 26, 28, 86-88.
3.
Bakan, D.
(1987). Psychology's digressions: A response to Krantz. New Ideas in Psychology, 5,
347-350.
4.
Bechtel, W.
(1988). Philosophy of science: An overview for cognitive
science. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum.
5.
Bower, G.H.
(1993). The fragmentation of psychology?American Psychologist, 48,
905-907.
6.
Churchland, P.M.
(1995). Eliminative materialism and the propositional
attitudes. In W. Lyons (Ed.), Modern philosophy of mind (pp.
214-239). London:
Everyman.
7.
Danziger, K.
(1990). Deconstructing the subject: Historical origins of
psychological research. New York:
Cambridge University Press.
8.
Davidson, D.
(1980). Mental events. In D. Davidson (Ed.), Essays on actions and events (pp.
207-227). Oxford, UK:
Oxford University Press.
9.
Dennett, D.C.
(1969). Content & consciousness.
New York:
Routledge.
10.
Eccles, J.C.
, & Robinson, D.N. (1984). The wonder of being human: Our brain and our
mind. New York: Free
Press.
11.
Fernald, D.
(1997). Psychology. Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Prentice
Hall.
12.
Feyerabend, P.
(1975). Against method (3rd ed.).
London:
Verso.
13.
Fisher, A.M.
(1997). Modern manifestations of materialism: A legacy of the enlightenment
discourse. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology,
17, 45-55.
14.
Fodor, J.
(1995).The persistence of the attitudes. In W. Lyons (Ed.), Modern philosophy of mind (pp.
240-271). London:
Everyman.
15.
Gadamer, H.-G.
(1976). Philosophical hermeneutics.
Berkeley: University of California
Press.
16.
Gibson, E.J.
(1994). Has psychology a future?Psychological Science, 5,
69-76.
17.
Giorgi, A.
(1970). Psychology as a human science: A phenomenologically
based approach. New York: Harper
& Row.
18.
Giorgi, A.
(1985).Toward the articulation of psychology as a coherent
discipline. In S. Koch & D.E. Leary (Eds.), A century of psychology as science (pp.
46-59).Washington, DC:
American Psychological
Association.
19.
Gray, P.
(1991). Psychology. New
York: Worth.
20.
Halling, S.
, & Lawrence, C. (1999). Social constructionism: Homogenizing the world, negating embodied
experience. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology,
19, 78-89.
21.
Hanson, N.R.
(1958). Patterns of discovery.
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge
University Press.
22.
Heidbreder, E.
(1933). Seven psychologies. New
York:
Appleton-Century.
23.
Hishinuma, E.S.
(1998). Pre-unified separatism and rapprochement between behaviorism and cognitive
psychology: The case of the reinforcer. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology,
18, 1-15.
24.
Hoshmand, L.H.
, & Polkinghorne, D.E. (1992). Redefining the science-practice relationship and professional
training. American Psychologist, 47,
55-66.
25.
Hyland, M.E.
(1985). Do personality variables exist in different ways?American Psychologist, 40,
1003-1010.
26.
James, W.
(1929). The varieties of religious experience: A study in
human nature. New York: Modern
Library. (Original work published 1902).
27.
James, W.
(1950). The principles of psychology (Vol. 2).
New York:
Dover. (Original work published 1890)
28.
James, W.
(1956).The dilemma of determinism. In W. James (Ed.), The will to believe and other essays in popular philosophy
(pp. 145-183). New York:
Dover. (Original work published
1897)
29.
James, W.
(1978). Pragmatism: A new name for some old ways of
thinking [with introduction by A.J. Ayer]. Cambridge,
MA: Harvard University Press.
(Original work published 1907)
30.
James, W.
(1996). Essays in radical empiricism.
Lincoln: University of Nebraska
Press. (Original work published 1912).
31.
Kimble, G.A.
(1994). A frame of reference for psychology. American Psychologist, 49,
510-519.
32.
Koch, S.
(1981).The nature and limits of psychological knowledge: Lessons of a quarter
century qua science. American Psychologist, 36,
257-269.
33.
Kohler, W.
(1947). Gestalt psychology. New
York: Liveright.
34.
Kuhn, T.S.
(1970). The structure of scientific revolutions
(2nd ed.). Chicago: The
University of Chicago Press.
35.
Lakatos, I.
(1970). Falsification and the methodology of scientific
research programmes. In I. Lakatos & A. Musgrave (Eds.), Criticism and the growth of knowledge (pp.
91-196). New York:
Cambridge University Press.
36.
Leahey, T.H.
(1992a).A history of psychology: Main currents in
psychological thought (3rd ed.). Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice
Hall.
37.
Leahey, T.H.
(1992b). The mythical revolutions of American psychology. American Psychologist, 47,
308-318.
38.
Manicas, P.T.
, & Secord, P.F. (1983). Implications for psychology of the new philosophy of science. American Psychologist, 38,
399-413.
39.
Martin, J.
, & Sugarman, J. (1999). Psychology's reality debate: A "levels of
reality" approach.Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology,
19, 177-194.
40.
May, R.
(1958). The contributions of existential
psychotherapy. In R. May, E. Angel, & H.F. Ellenberger (Eds.), Existence: A new dimension in psychiatry and psychology
(pp. 37-91). New York:
Basic Books.
41.
McNally, R.J.
(1992). Disunity in psychology: Chaos or specialization?American Psychologist, 47, 1054.
42.
Miller, G.A.
(1985). The constitutive problem of psychology.
In S. Koch and D. Leary (Eds.), A century of psychology as science (pp.
40-45).NewYork:
McGraw-Hill.
43.
Neisser, U.
(1976). Cognition and reality. New
York: Freeman.
44.
Newell, A.
(1990). Unified theories of cognition.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press.
45.
Notterman, J.M.
(2000). Note on reductionism in cognitive psychology: Reification of cognitive
processes into mind, mind-brain equivalence, and brain-computer
analogy. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology,
20, 116-121.
46.
Penfield, W.
(1975). The mystery of the mind: A critical study of
consciousness and the human brain. Princeton,
NJ: Princeton University
Press.
47.
Popper, K.
(1963). Conjectures and refutations.
New York: Basic
Books.
48.
Quine, W.V.O.
(1953). Two dogmas of empiricism. In W.V.O. Quine (Ed.), From a logical point of view (pp.
20-46). Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press.
49.
Reisberg, D.
(1997). Cognition: Exploring the science of the mind.
New York:
Norton.
50.
Robins, R.W.
, Gosling, S.D., & Craik, K.H. (1999). An empirical analysis of trends in psychology. American Psychologist, 54,
117-128.
51.
Robinson, D.N.
(1985a). Philosophy of psychology.
New York: Columbia University
Press.
52.
Robinson, D.N.
(1985b). Science, psychology, and explanations: Synonyms
or antonyms? In S. Koch and D. Leary (Eds.), A century of psychology as science (pp.
60-74). New York:
McGraw-Hill.
53.
Robinson, D.N.
(1986). An intellectual history of psychology.
Madison: University of Wisconsin
Press.
54.
Robinson, D.N.
(1993). Is there a Jamesian tradition in psychology?American Psychologist, 48,
638-643.
55.
Robinson, D.N.
(1995). The logic of reductionistic models. New Ideas in Psychology, 13,
1-8.
56.
Robinson, D.N.
(2000). Paradigms and 'the myth of framework': How science
progresses. Theory & Psychology, 10,
39-47.
57.
Rogers, C.R.
(1964). Toward a science of the person. In T.W. Wann (Ed.), Behaviorism and phenomenology: Contrasting bases for modern
psychology (pp. 109-140).
Chicago: University of Chicago
Press.
Rychlak, J.F.
(1991). Artificial intelligence and human reason: A
teleological critique. New York:
Columbia University Press.
60.
Rychlak, J.F.
(1993). A suggested principle of complementarity in psychology: In theory, not
method. American Psychologist, 48,
933-942.
61.
Rychlak, J.F.
(1994). Logical learning theory: A human teleology and its
empirical support. Lincoln:
University of Nebraska Press.
62.
Rychlak, J.F.
(1996). Memory: A logical learning theory account.The Journal of Mind and Behavior, 17,
229-250.
63.
Sarbin, T.R.
(1986). The narrative as root metaphor for
psychology. In T. Sarbin (Ed.), Narrative psychology: The storied nature of human conduct.
New York:
Praeger.
64.
Sass, L.A.
(1988). Humanism, hermeneutics and the concept of the
human subject. In S.B. Messer, L.A. Sass, & R.L. Woolfolk (Eds.), Hermeneutics and psychological theory: Interpretive perspectives
and personality, psychotherapy, and psychopathology (pp.
222-271). New Brunswick,
NJ: Rutgers University
Press.
65.
Schrag, C.O.
(1983).The question of the unity of the human sciences revisited. Analecta Husserliana, 14,
77-95.
Searle, J.
(1980). Minds, brains, and programs. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3,
417-424.
68.
Slife, B.D.
(1987). Can cognitive psychology account for metacognitive functions of the
mind?The Journal of Mind and Behavior, 8,
195-208.
69.
Slife, B.D.
(1995). Information and time.Theory & Psychology, 5,
533-550.
70.
Slife, B.D.
, Hope, C., & Nebeker, R.S. (1999). Examining the relationship between religious spirituality and psychological
science. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 39,
51-85.
71.
Slife, B.D.
, & Williams, R.N. (1995). What's behind the research: Discovering
hidden assumptions in the behavioral sciences.
Thousand Oaks, CA.:
Sage.
72.
Slife, B.D.
, & Williams, R.N. (1997). Toward a theoretical psychology: Should a subdiscipline be formally
recognized?American Psychologist, 52,
117-129.
73.
Spence, J.T.
(1987). Centrifugal versus centripetal tendencies in psychology: Will the center
hold?American Psychologist, 42,
1052-1054.
74.
Sperry, R.W.
(1995). The riddle of consciousness and the changing scientific worldview. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 35,
7-33.
75.
Staats, A.W.
(1983). Psychology's crisis of disunity:
Philosophy and method for a unified science. New
York: Praeger.
76.
Staats, A.W.
(1996). Behavior and personality: Psychological
behaviorism. New York:
Springer.
77.
Stanovich, K.E.
(1998). How to think straight about psychology (5th
ed.). New York:
Longman.
78.
Stephenson, W.
(1953). The study of behavior: Q technique and its
methodology. Chicago: University
of Chicago Press.
79.
Sternberg, R.J.
(1992). Too young to die-let's not bury psychology alive: A
response to Gardner. New Ideas in Psychology, 10,
195-205.
80.
Taylor, C.
(1985). Human agency and language: Philosophical papers
(Vol. 1, pp. 117-138). New
York: Cambridge University
Press.
81.
Taylor, C.
(1989). Sources of the self: The making of the modern
identity. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press.
82.
Taylor, E.
(1992). The case for a uniquely American Jamesian
tradition in psychology. In M.E. Donnelly (Ed.), Reinterpreting the legacy of William James (pp.
3-28).Washington, DC:
American Psychological
Association.
83.
Taylor, E.
(1998).William James on the demise of positivism in
American psychology. In R.W. Reiber & K.D. Salzinger (Eds.), Psychology: Theoretical-historical perspectives (2nd
ed., pp. 101-132).Washington,
DC: American Psychological
Association.
84.
Toulmin, S.
(1987). On not over unifying psychology: A response to Kranz. New Ideas in Psychology, 5,
351-353.
85.
van Kaam, A.
(1966). Existential foundations of psychology.
Pittsburgh, PA: Duquesne
University Press.
86.
Varela, F.J.
, Thompson, E., & Rosch, E. (1991). The embodied mind: Cognitive science and human
experience. Cambridge, MA: MIT
Press.
87.
Viney, W.
(1996). Disunity in psychology and other sciences: The network or the block
universe?The Journal of Mind and Behavior, 17,
31-44.
88.
Watkins, M.J.
(1990). Mediationism and the obfuscation of memory. American Psychologist, 45,
328-335.
89.
Weiten, W.
(1998). Psychology: Themes and variations (4th
ed.). Pacific Grove, CA:
Brooks/Cole.
90.
Wertz, F.J.
(1999). Multiple methods in psychology: Epistemological grounding and the
possibility of unity. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology,
19, 131-166.
91.
Williams, R.N.
(1987). Can cognitive psychology offer a meaningful account of meaningful human
action?The Journal of Mind and Behavior, 8,
209-222.
92.
Yanchar, S.C.
(1997a). Fragmentation in focus: History, integration, and the project of
evaluation. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology,
17, 150-170.
93.
Yanchar, S.C.
(1997b). William James and the challenge of methodological pluralism. Journal of Mind and Behavior, 18,
425-442.
94.
Yanchar, S.C.
, & Kristensen, K.B. (1996). Notes on a naturalized epistemology. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology,
16, 93-102.
95.
Yanchar, S.C.
, & Slife, B.D. (1997). Pursuing unity in a fragmented psychology: Problems and prospects. Review of General Psychology, 1,
235-255.
96.
Zechmeister, J.S.
, & Zechmeister, E.B. (2000). Introductory textbooks and psychology's core concepts. Teaching of Psychology, 27,
6-11.
