Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comment
. 2020 Sep;54(3):572-578.
doi: 10.1007/s12124-020-09542-3.

Staying with Questions and Resisting Quick Answers: Commentary on Zagaria, Andò, and Zennaro

Affiliations
Comment

Staying with Questions and Resisting Quick Answers: Commentary on Zagaria, Andò, and Zennaro

Davood Gozli. Integr Psychol Behav Sci. 2020 Sep.

Abstract

In their target article, Zagaria et al. (Integrative Psychological & Behavioral Science, 2020) highlight the fragmented state of mainstream Psychology. Their diagnosis begins with an analysis of how core psychological terms are treated in introductory textbooks. To remedy the state of affairs, they propose using evolutionary psychology to unify Psychology. In the present commentary, I join the authors' critical stance, while also raising several questions: (1) Can we adopt an evolutionary meta-theory and still demand that our core concepts have fixed meaning? (2) Can evolutionary theory apply to the normative dimension of the sociocultural domain? (3) Can evolutionary theory account for the critique of psychological science? These questions, I believe, point out several gaps in the target article that require further attention. I argue that unless we identify the essential differences between mainstream psychology and contrarian psychology, we repeat the mistakes of mainstream psychology under a new guise.

Keywords: Crisis of psychology; Culture; Evolutionary Theory; General Psychology; Normativity; Prefiguration.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment on

  • Psychology: a Giant with Feet of Clay.
    Zagaria A, Ando' A, Zennaro A. Zagaria A, et al. Integr Psychol Behav Sci. 2020 Sep;54(3):521-562. doi: 10.1007/s12124-020-09524-5. Integr Psychol Behav Sci. 2020. PMID: 32297037

References

    1. Allport, D. A. (1987). Selection for action: Some behavioral and neurophysiological considerations of attention and action. In H. Heuer & A. F. Sanders (Eds.), Perspectives on Perception and Action (pp. 395–419). New York: Routledge.
    1. Bergner, R. M. (2016). What is behaviour? And why is it not reducible to biological states of affairs? Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 36, 41–55. - DOI
    1. Bergner, R. M. (2017). What is a person? What is the self? Formulations for a science of psychology. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 37, 77–90. - DOI
    1. Billig, M. (2012). Undisciplined beginnings, academic success, and discursive psychology. British Journal of Social Psychology, 51(3), 413–424. - DOI
    1. Brinkmann, S. (2010). Psychology as a moral science: Perspectives on normativity. Cham: Springer.

LinkOut - more resources