A psicologia teórica e filosófica como uma área de pesquisa acadêmica

  • Flávio Fernandes Fontes Grupo de Estudos e Pesquisas sobre o Trabalho (GEPET). Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte (Natal), Brasil
  • Jorge Tarcísio da Rocha Falcão Grupo de Estudos e Pesquisas sobre o Trabalho (GEPET). Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte (Natal), Brasil

Resumo

Pesquisas filosóficas e conceituais vêm sendo reiteradamente apontadas como necessárias na Psicologia, dada a caracterização da disciplina como excessivamente centrada no método e na coleta de dados empíricos. Em resposta a isso, ocorreu ao longo das últimas décadas o surgimento de uma nova área de pesquisa, a Psicologia Teórica e Filosófica. Com o objetivo de fornecer uma introdução a este campo, são destacados alguns dos principais periódicos, programas de pós-graduação e instituições que produzem conhecimento nesta vertente. Procurou-se delimitar o escopo e o objetivo da Psicologia Teórica e Filosófica. Foram revisados diferentes autores que procuraram estabelecer quais as suas principais atividades, para isso foram elencados alguns exemplos de pesquisas importantes, e concluiu-se a relevância do fomento deste tipo de pesquisa para a Psicologia como um todo.

Referências

Abi-Hashem, N. (1998). Returning to the fountains.
American Psychologist, 53(1), 63-64.
Alston, W. P. (1985). Conceptual analysis and
psychological theory. In: S. Koch & D. E. Leary,
A century of psychology as science. (pp. 638-652).
Washington: APA.
Araujo, S. F. (Org.). (2012). História e filosofia da Psicologia:
perspectivas contemporâneas. Juiz de Fora: UFJF.
Araujo, S. F., Caropreso, F. S., Simanke, R. T., &
Castañon, G. A. (2013). The Wilhelm Wundt
Center and the first graduate program for the
history and philosophy of psychology in Brazil: a
brief report. History of Psychology, 16(3), 222-224.Bakan, D. (1966). The test of significance in
psychological research. Psychological Bulletin,
66(6), 423-437.
Banicki, K. (2011). Connective conceptual analysis and
psychology. Theory & Psychology, 22(3), 310-323.
Brand, J. L. (1998). Theoretical psychology, Yes;
methodological egalitarianism, No! American
Psychologist, 53(1), 66-67.
Brock, A. (1998). Pedagogy and research. The
psychologist, 11, 169-171.
Brockmeier, J. & Harré, R. (2003). Narrativa:
problemas e promessas de um paradigma
alternativo. Psicologia reflexão e crítica, 16(3).
Recuperado de: http://www.scielo.br/pdf/prc/
v16n3/v16n3a11.pdf
Castañon, G. A. (2012). Filosofia da psicologia: uma
taxonomia. In: S. F. Araujo (2012), História e
filosofia da psicologia: perspectivas contemporâneas.
(pp. 187-221). Juiz de Fora: Universidade Federal
de Juiz de Fora.
Cetina, K. K. (1991b). Merton’s sociology of
science: the first and the last sociology of science?
Contemporary Sociology, 20(4), 522-526.
Cohen, J. (1994). The earth is round (p<.05).
American Psychologist, 49(12), 997-1003.
Cruz, M. G. A. (2013). A defesa de uma atitude
filosófica na psicologia: breve reflexão sobre a
prática psi e o processo de medicalização. Filogenese,
6(1), 78-92.
Danziger, K. (1985). The methodological imperative in
psychology. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 15, 1-13.
Danziger, K. (2002). Constructing the subject: historical
origins of psychological research. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Edwards, D. (2004). Psicologia discursiva: unindo
teoria e método com um exemplo. In: L. Íñiguez
(Org.) (2004), Manual de análise do discurso em
ciências sociais. (pp. 181-205). Petrópolis: Vozes.
Fagerberg, J., Landström, H., & Martin, B. R. (2012).
Exploring the emerging knowledge base of ‘the
knowledge society’. Research Policy, 41, 1121-1131.
Feest, U. (2012). O operacionalismo na psicologia: sobre
o que é o debate, sobre o que deveria ser o debate. In:
S. F. Araujo (2012). História e filosofia da psicologia:
perspectivas contemporâneas. (pp. 259-296). Juiz de
Fora: Universidade Federal de Juiz de Fora.
Gantt, E. E. (1998). Some questions about theoretical
psychology. American Psychologist, 53(1), 65-66.
Gergen, K. J. (1973). Social Psychology as History.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 26(2),
309-320. Recuperado de http://www.swarthmore.
edu/Documents/faculty/gergen/soc_psych.pdf
Gergen, K. J. (1985). The Social Constructionist
Movement in Modern Psychology. American
Psychologist, 40(3). Recuperado de: http://www.
swarthmore.edu/Documents/faculty/gergen/Social_
Constructionist_Movement.pdf
Gergen, K. J. (1996). Social Psychology as Social
Construction: The Emerging Vision. Recuperado
de: http://www.swarthmore.edu/Documents/
faculty/gergen/Social_Psychology_as_Social_
Construction_The%20Emerging_Vision.pdf
Gergen, K. J. (2009). An invitation to social
construction. London: Sage.
Gigerenzer, G. (2004). Mindless statistics. The Journal
of Socio-Economics, 33, 587-606.
Grace, R. C. & Farreras, I. G. (1998). Are theoretical
consultants needed? American Psychologist, 53(1), 67-68.
Harré, R. & Secord, P. F. (1972). The explanation of
social behavior. Totowa: Rowman and Littlefield.
Howard, R. W. (1998). Every psychologist needs to
be a theorist. American Psychologist, 53(1), 69-70.
Koch, S. (1981). The Nature and limits of
psychological knowledge: Lessons of a century qua
“science”. American Psychologist, 36(3), 257-269.
Koch, S. (1999). Psychology’s Bridgman versus
Bridgman’s Bridgman: a study in cognitive pathology.
In: S. Koch (1999), Psychology in human context.
Essays in dissidence and reconstruction. (pp. 366-
393). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Köche, J. C. (2005). Pesquisa científica. Critérios
epistemológicos. Petrópolis: Vozes.
Kuhn, T. S. (2009). A estrutura das revoluções
científicas (Trad. Beatriz Vianna Boeira e
Nelson Boeira). São Paulo: Perspectiva. (Texto
originalmente publicado em 1962).
Kvale, S. (Ed.) (1992). Psychology and postmodernism.
London: Sage.
Lakatos, I. (1989). The methodology of scientific
research programmes – philosophical papers, vol.1.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lambdin, C. (2012). Significance tests as sorcery:
science is empirical – significance tests are not.
Theory & Psychology, 22(1), 67-90.
Laurenti, C. (2012). Trabalho conceitual em
psicologia: pesquisa ou “perfumaria”? Psicologia em
Estudo (Maringá), 17(2), 179-181.
Machado, A., Lourenço, O., & Silva, F. J. (2000).
Facts, concepts, theories: the shape of psychology’s
epistemic triangle. Behavior and Philosophy, 28, 1-40.Machado, A. & Silva, F. J. (2007). Toward a richer
view of the scientific method: the role of conceptual
analysis. American Psychologist, 62(7), 671-681.
Martin, J. (2004). What can theoretical psychology
do? Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical
Psychology, 24(1), 1-13.
Martin, B. R., Nightingale, P., & Yegros-Yegros, A.
(2012). Science and technology studies: exploring
the knowledge base. Research Policy, 41, 1182-1204.
Meehl, P. (1978). Theoretical risks and tabular
asterisks: sir Karl, sir Ronald, and the slow
progress of soft psychology. Journal of Consulting
and Clinical Psychology, 46, 806-834.
Meux, M. O. (1998). A value agenda for theoretical
psychology. American Psychologist, 53(1), 64-65.
Michell, J. (1997). Quantitative science and the
definition of measurement in psychology. British
Journal of Psychology, 88, 355-383.
Michell, J. (2000). Normal science, pathological
science and psychometrics. Theory & Psychology,
10(5), 639-667.
Michell, J. (2003). The quantitative imperative:
positivism, naïve realism and the place of qualitative
methods. Theory & Psychology, 13(1), 5-31.
Michell, J. (2006). Psychophysics, intensive
magnitudes, and the psychometricians’ fallacy.
Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and
Biomedical Sciences, 17, 414-432.
Moscovici, S. (1972). Society and theory in social
psychology. In: J. Israel & H. Tajfel (Eds.) (1972),
The context of social psychology: a critical assessment.
(pp. 17-68). London: Academic Press.
Murray, M. (2003). Narrative psychology and
narrative analysis. In: P. M. Camic, J. E. Rhodes,
& L. Yardley (Ed.) (2003). Qualitative research in
psychology. Expanding perspectives in methodology
and design. (pp. 95-112). Washington: APA.
Potter, J. (2003). Discourse analysis and Discursive
Psychology. In: P. M. Camic, J. E. Rhodes, &
L. Yardley (Ed.) (2003), Qualitative research in
psychology. Expanding perspectives in methodology
and design. (pp. 73-94). Washington: APA.
Quinn, M. H. (1998). The role of theory in
psychotherapy. American Psychologist, 53(1), 71.
Robinson, D. N. (2007). Theoretical Psychology.
What is it and who needs it? Theory and Psychology,
17(2), 187-198.
Slife, B. D. (2000). The practice of theoretical
psychology. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical
Psychology, 20(2), 97-115.
Slife, B. D. & Williams, R. N. (1997). Toward a theoretical
psychology: Should a subdiscipline be formally
recognized? American Psychologist, 52(2), 117-129.
Slife, B. D. & Williams, R. N. (1998). Theoretical
psychology as a subdiscipline: the conversation
continues. American Psychologist, 53(1), 71-72.
Stam, H. J. (1998). Theory and disciplinarity.
American Psychologist, 53(1), 70.
Sturm, T. (2012). Há algum problema com a
psicologia matemática no século dezoito? Um
novo olhar sobre o velho argumento de Kant. In:
S. F. Araujo (2012). História e filosofia da psicologia:
perspectivas contemporâneas. (pp. 87-132). Juiz
de Fora: Universidade Federal de Juiz de Fora.
Teo, T. (2009). Editorial. Journal of Theoretical and
Philosophical Psychology, 29(1), 1-4.
Toulmin, S. & Leary, D. E. (1985). The cult of
empiricism in psychology, and beyond. In: S. Koch
& D. E. Leary (1985). A century of psychology as
science. (pp. 594-617). Washington: APA.
Wachtel, P. L. (1980). Investigation and its discontents:
some constraints on progress in psychological
research. American Psychologist, 35(5), 399-408.
Wakefield, J. C. (2007). Why psychology needs
conceptual analysts: Wachtel’s ‘discontents’ revisited.
Applied and Preventive Psychology, 12, 39-43.
Weems, C. F. (1998). Theoretical psychology:
subdiscipline or metadiscipline? American
Psychologist, 53(1), 68-69.
Wittgenstein, L. (1996). Investigações filosóficas. (Trad.
José Carlos Bruni). São Paulo: Nova Cultural.
Publicado
2016-10-04
Seção
Artigos