The categorical system of psychology. An experience of constructing a theory of theories in psychology

We shall point it out again: not a cell, even in its peak development, but a dynamic system of categories is able to embrace and reflect in itself the mental world of a human being. This also explains the rejected claim to build a single, all explaining theory of psychology. At the same time, it is expedient to try to preserve and realize the desire to construct a theory of theories of psychology.

The proposed project of theoretical psychology, as it can be assumed, contains the desired model of the theory of theories, a tool for resolving the historical crisis of psychology, which L.S. Vygotsky wrote about in those early years. We are talking about a categorical approach in the construction of a theory of theories in order to avoid duality in the interpretation of this phrase. However, another version of what the theory of theories should be like and what it should serve is quite possible: for example, to reveal the laws of the spontaneous formation of theoretical systems, the invariants of movement of psychological concepts and schools. A typical illustration of such a movement is the destiny of psychoanalysis, reflexology, Gestalt psychology and personalism in the understanding of L.S. Vygotsky, the author of the Historical Meaning of the Psychological Crisis: «These destinies that are as similar as four drops in the same rain attract ideas along the same path» (Vygotsky, 1982). L.S. Vygotsky describes in detail the internal logic of the movement of an idea, and the natural stages of its origin and extinction. The idea of the inevitable logic in the movement of scientific thought illustrated by `developed sciences' was very actively and fruitfully discussed in the works of G.P. Schedrovitsky and his school (the idea of historical theory of solving scientific problems, and genetic reconstruction), as well as in the works of other prominent philosophers. In this understanding, the theory of theories would target us to analyze and summarize tendencies, which, as we should emphasize once again, spontaneously manifest «with such surprising regularity, constancy, with such regular monotony in various fields, that they positively allow the prediction about the development of a different concept or discovery, of an idea» (Vygotsky, 1982). But speaking of the theory of theories, we hold a different view (however, it is fully compatible with the first perspective). We see in it not only a generalization and not only the principle of the construction of psychology as an integral field of knowledge. The idea that the `cell' of the categorical system of psychology (and we are talking about each category, starting with the protopsychological categories), is woven from system-forming and formative linking threads that emanate from the `cells' of the underlying level, is reason to think about the extent to which these connections are theoretically and empirically developed. Defining the category of value, we should, for example, refer to the categories of motive, subject, action, image, experience, interaction, and situation. It is quite probable that, purely formally, this and other similar definitions could involve all the categories listed. But the following question is quite legitimate: have the proposed definitions already been ensured by any available psychological developments? It is absolutely clear that the elaboration of intercategorial connections (the subject of specific studies) and the predetermination of such connections (the methodological function of the categorical table) are far from being similar. The search for the relevant theoretical and empirical arguments in favor of the proposed definitions (which is necessary to establish a general view, to build theoretical psychology) is at the same time the development path of each of the specific areas of psychological knowledge. Theoretical psychology, in its categorical interpretation, is called upon (with reference to each specific theory) to answer the question: what this theory is for psychology as a whole, and what psychology as a whole is for each given specific theory.

L.S. Vygotsky, while developing the foundations of a new general science, thought of creating a special tool (instrument) that would allow him to master the practice of psychological knowledge. The future will show whether the categorical model of the theory of theories proposed by us is such a sought-after tool of knowledge, whether it fulfills the task of integrating and developing private psychological research.

References

1. Vygotsky, L.S. (1982). Istoricheskiy smysl psikhologicheskogo krizisa [The historical meaning of the psychological crisis]. In L.S. Vygotsky, Collected works (Vol. 1, pp. 291-436). Moscow: Pedagogika. Leontiev, A.N. (1975). Deyatel'nost'. Soznaniye. Lichnost' [Object activity. Consciousness. Personality]. Moscow: Politizdat.

2. Rubinstein, S.L. (1998). Osnovy obshchey psikhologii [Fundamentals of general psychology]. Saint Petersburg: Piter.

3. Rubinstein, S.L. (1997). Chelovek i mir [The person and the world]. M.: Nauka.

4. Yaroshevsky, M.G. (1974). Psikhologiya v XX stoletii [Psychology in the XX century] (2nd ed.). Moscow: Politizdat.

Размещено на Allbest.ru