Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

This paper comments on an article by Derksen, who argues that the theory of evolution cannot unify the social sciences in general and psychology in particular. Derksen also elevates his ‘against integration’ argument to an in-principle level whereby he rejects integration as a solution to the problem of fragmentation. Where Derksen limits his arguments to evolutionary theory, they are welcome; however, where he elevates his arguments to an in-principle level, they become unmindful of a vast history on fragmentation and integration/unification. Derksen also implicitly defines integration as seamless homogeneity, which is only one definition of integration/unification used in the literature. Finally, his alternatives to integration are found to be lacking in detailed explanation and critical reflection.

Keywords

evolutionary psychology fragmentation integration pluralism unification

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Bakan, D. (1996). The crisis in psychology . Journal of Social Distress and the Homeless, 5, 335-342 .

Bühler, K. (1927). Die krise der psychologie. Jena: Verlag von Gustav Fischer.

Derksen, M. (2005). Against integration: Why evolution cannot unify the social sciences . Theory & Psychology, 15, 139-162 .

Dixon, R. A. (1983). Theoretical proliferation in psychology: A plea for sustained disunity . The Psychological Record, 33, 337-340 .

Driesch, H. (1925). The crisis in psychology. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press .

Drob, S. L. (2003). Fragmentation in contemporary psychology: A dialectical solution . Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 43, 102-123 .

Giorgi, A. (1970). Psychology as a human science: A phenomenologically based approach. New York: Harper & Row .

Giorgi, A. (1985). Theoretical plurality and unity in psychology . The Psychological Record, 35, 177-181 .

Henriques, G. (2003). The tree of knowledge system and the theoretical unification of psychology . Review of General Psychology, 7, 150-182 .

10.

Henriques, G. (2004). Psychology defined . Journal of Clinical Psychology, 60, 1207-1221 .

11.

Hoshmand, L. T. , & Martin, J. (1994). Naturalizing the epistemology of psychological research . Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 14, 171-189 .

12.

Kantor, J. (1971). Can the psychophysical experiment reconcile introspectionists and objectivists? In J. R. Kantor (Ed.), The aim and progress of psychology and other sciences (pp. 174-199). Chicago, IL: Principia . (Original work published 1922.)

13.

Kantor, J. (1984). Scientific unity and spiritualistic disunity . The Psychological Record, 34, 69-71 .

14.

Kendler, H. H. (1981). Psychology: A science in conflict. New York: Oxford University Press .

15.

Koch, S. (1951). Theoretical psychology, 1950: An overview . Psychological Review, 58, 295-301 .

16.

Koch, S. (1969). Psychology cannot be a coherent science . Psychology Today, 3(4), 14-14, 64-68 .

17.

Koch, S. (1993). ‘Psychology’ or ‘the psychological studies’? American Psychologist, 48, 902-904 .

18.

Rieber, R. W. , & Wollock, J. (1997). Vygotsky’s ‘crisis’, and its meaning today. In R. W. Rieber & J. Wollock (Eds.), The collected works of L.S. Vygotsky (Vol. 3, pp. vii-xii). New York: Plenum .

19.

Royce, J. R. (Ed.). (1970). Toward unification in psychology. Toronto: University of Toronto Press .

20.

Sarason, S. B. (1981). Psychology misdirected. New York: Free Press .

21.

Scriven, M. (1969). Psychology without a paradigm. In L. Berger (Ed.), Clinical-cognitive psychology (pp. 9-24). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall .

22.

Staats, A. W. (1983). Psychology’s crisis of disunity: Philosophy and method for a unified science. New York: Praeger .

23.

Sternberg, R. J. , & Grigorenko, E. L. (2001). Unified psychology . American Psychologist, 56, 1069-1079 .

24.

Tolman, C. W. (1989). The general psychological crisis and its comparative psychological resolution . International Journal of Comparative Psychology, 2, 197-209 .

25.

Tolman, C. W. (1991). Theoretical indeterminancy, pluralism and the conceptual concrete . Theory & Psychology, 1, 147-162 .

26.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1997). The historical meaning of the crisis in psychology: A methodological investigation. In R. W. Rieber & J. Wollock (Eds.), The collected works of L.S. Vygotsky (Vol. 3, pp. 233-344). New York: Plenum .

27.

Wann, T. (Ed.). (1964). Behaviorism and phenomenology: Contrasting bases for modern psychology. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press .

28.

Willy, R. (1899). Die krisis in der psychologie. Leipzig: O.R. Reisland .

29.

Yanchar, S. C. (1997). Fragmentation in focus: History, integration, and the project of evaluation . Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 17, 150-169 .

30.

Yanchar, S. C. , & Slife, B. D. (1997). Pursuing unity in a fragmented psychology: Problems and prospects . Review of General Psychology, 1, 235-255 .

Against Integration or Against Using Evolutionary Theory to Homogenize Psychology?

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References