Araujo begins by criticising what he calls the “social turn” in the history of psychology. He singles out the work of Kurt Danziger for special criticism in this regard. He then outlines the emergence of an allegedly new field called “History and Philosophy of Science” (HPS) and calls for a different approach which he labels a “philosophical” history of psychology. Here I examine his criticism of Danziger’s work and suggest that it is unjustified. I also point out that there is nothing new about the field of HPS and nothing original about the idea of relating history and philosophy of psychology. I conclude by suggesting that, although Araujo’s criticism is unjustified, it can give some insight into where his alternative path for the future will lead. It is an attempt to excise the sociology of knowledge from historical discourse and to return to a more traditional history of ideas.
ArabatzisT. (2012). Hidden entities and experimental practice: Renewing the dialogue between history and philosophy of science. In MauskopfS.SchmaltzT. (Eds.), Integrating history and philosophy of science (pp. 125–139). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer.
2.
AraujoS. F. (2017). Toward a philosophical history of psychology: An alternative path for the future. Theory & Psychology, 27, 87–107. doi: 10.1177/0959354316656062
3.
BenetkaG. (2002). Denkstile der Psychologie [Thought styles in psychology.] Vienna, Austria: WUV.
4.
BloorD. (1976). Knowledge and social imagery. London, UK: Routledge.
5.
BrockA. C. (2005). Trying to keep it all together: History, theory and philosophy in psychology. Theory & Psychology, 15, 409–411. doi: 10.1177/095935430501500308
6.
BrockA. C. (2006). Rediscovering the history of psychology: Interview with Kurt Danziger. History of Psychology, 9, 1–16. doi: 10.1037/1093–4510.9.1.1
7.
BrockA. C. (2015). The history of psychological objects. In MartinJ.SugarmanJ.SlaneyK. (Eds.), Wiley handbook of theoretical and philosophical psychology (pp. 151–165). Oxford, UK: Wiley. doi: 10.1002/9781118748213.ch10
8.
BrockA. C. (2016). The new history of psychology: Some (different) answers to Lovett’s five questions. History of Psychology. Advance online publication. doi: 10.1037/hop0000036
9.
DanzigerK. (1990). Constructing the subject. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
10.
DanzigerK. (2003). Where history, theory, and philosophy meet. In HillD. B.KralM. J. (Eds.), About psychology: Essays at the crossroads of history, theory, and philosophy (pp. 19–33). Albany: SUNY Press.
11.
Elder-VassD. (2012). The reality of social construction. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
12.
FrancoisK.LoeweB.MuellerT.Van KerkhovenB. (Eds.). (2011). Foundations of the formal sciences VII: Bringing together philosophy and sociology of science. London, UK: College Publications.
13.
GergenK. J. (1985). The social constructionist movement in modern psychology. American Psychologist, 40(3), 266–275. doi: 10.1037/0003–066X.40.3.266
14.
HillD. B.KralM. J. (Eds.). (2003). About psychology: Essays at the crossroads of history, theory, and philosophy. Albany: SUNY Press.
15.
KochM. (1976). Introspektion. [Introspection.] In RitterJ.GründerK. (Eds.), Historisches Wörterbuch der Philosophie (Vol. 4, pp. 522–524). Basel, Switzerland: Schwabe.
16.
KuschM. (1999). Psychological knowledge: A social history and philosophy. London, UK: Routledge.
17.
LovettB. (2006). The new history of psychology: A review and critique. History of Psychology, 9, 17–37. doi: 10.1037/1093–4510.9.1.17
18.
RieschH. (2014). Philosophy, history and sociology of science: Interdisciplinary relations and complex social identities. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 48, 30–37.doi: 10.1016/j.shpsa.2014.09.013
19.
ShapinS. (1982). History of science and its sociological reconstructions. History of Science, 20, 157–211. doi: 10.1177/007327538202000301
20.
ShapinS. (1995). Here and everywhere: Sociology of scientific knowledge. Annual Review of Sociology, 21, 289–321. doi: 10.1146/annurev.so.21.080195.001445
21.
StamH. J. (1992). Deconstructing the subject: Banishing the ghost of Boring. Contemporary Psychology, 37, 629–632. doi: 10.1037/032310
22.
WilsonF. (1991). Mill and Comte on the method of introspection. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 27, 107–129. doi: 10.1002/1520–6696(199104)27:2<107::AID-JHBS2300270202>3.0.CO;2-M
23.
WundtW. (1888). Selbstbeobachtung und innere Wahrnehmung [Self-observation and inner perception]. Philosophische Studien, 1, 615–617.
WundtW. (1907). Über Ausfrageexperimente und über die Methoden zur Psychologie des Denkens [On interview-experiments and on the methods of the psychology of thought]. Psychologische Studien, 3, 301–390.
