The Critique of Psychology: From Kant to Postcolonial Theory

Library of the History of Psychological Theories

by Thomas Teo

Closely paralleling the history of psychology is the history of its critics, their theories, and their contributions. The Critique of Psychology is the first book to trace this alternate history, from a unique perspective that complements the many existing empirical, theoretical, and social histories of the field.

Thomas Teo cogently synthesizes major historical and theoretical narratives to describe two centuries of challenges to—and the reactions of—the mainstream. Some of these critiques of content, methodology, relevance, and philosophical worldview have actually influenced and become integrated into the canon; others pose moral questions still under debate. All are accessibly presented so that readers may judge their value for themselves:

- Kant’s critique of rational and empirical psychology at the end of the 18th century

- The natural-scientific critique of philosophical psychology in the 19th century

- The human-scientific critique of natural-scientific psychology

- The Marxist traditions of critique

- Feminist and postmodern critiques and the contemporary mainstream

- Postcolonial critiques and the shift from cross-cultural to multicultural psychology

This is not a book of critique for critique’s sake: Teo defines the field as a work in progress with goals that are evolving yet constant. In emphasizing ethical and political questions faced by psychology as a discipline, this visionary book points students, academics, and practitioners toward new possibilities for their shared future.

Genres: Psychology, Nonfiction, Philosophy

252 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 2005

Reviews

[Davood Gozli]

In The Critique of Psychology: From Kant to Postcolonial Theory, Teo provides an impressively large and inclusive picture of psychology and the ways in which psychologists have attempted to define their discipline. From the outset, we learn that Psychology consists of three major sub-disciplines of (a) natural-scientific psychology, (b) human-scientific psychology, and (c) critical psychology. The first two approaches represent positive programs for establishing a discipline, and have existed for as long as psychology has existed, whereas critical psychology involves adoption of an external perspective that points out important shortcomings in already-existing programs and viewpoints. Any approach to psychology (naturalistic or humanistic), furthermore, brings with it components along three dimensions of (1) subject-matter, (2) methodology, and (3) application/relevance. Teo's book highlights what is most critical in psychological thought, including the primacy of subject-matter (in the case of a human-scientific psychology) or the primacy of method (in the case of natural-scientific psychology) in a variety of approaches. The book can also serve as a reference and a set of pointers to the important (critical) works across the history of psychology.

The natural-scientific and the human-scientific approaches to psychology differ in several ways. They not only differ in what they hold as the proper subject matter of psychology, but they also differ in their strengths and weaknesses. The strength of the natural-scientific approach to psychology is due to (i) associating with other natural sciences, instead of associating with philosophy. We should keep in mind that associating with natural sciences was an important political decision for psychology. Relevant to the first point of strength, the naturalistic approach (ii) incorporates statistical methods and quantifiable accounts that provide it with objective legitimacy, and (iii) having the promise of unity. The major weakness of the natural-scientific approach is the actual lack of theoretical unity. Despite adopting the methods of the natural sciences, the vast diversity of psychological phenomena and the different ways in which the same phenomena could be approached has led to an increasing amount of diversity and separation.

The strengths of the human-scientific approach lie in (i) its recognition of the human, social, and cultural dimensions and (ii) not requiring theoretical unity to the same degree that the natural sciences do. Its weakness, however, is (i) association with the weaker disciplines such as philosophy, and (ii) inability to produce concrete and quantifiable results comparable to the natural sciences. More than anything, the Critique of Psychology allowed me to see how interesting developments in psychological thought have arisen against – and as a reaction to – other established viewpoints. The attempts of thinkers such as Dilthey, Spranger, and Giorgi – who worked toward a human-scientific framework – would not have the same rigor without the dominant background of the natural-scientific approach to psychology. Critical psychology is a reactionary psychology.

Due to the dense writing style, the Critique of Psychology is difficult to read, especially for the readers who are not already familiar with the major figures in the history of psychology. The writing style at times comes across as a collection of separate note-takings and, as such, it is not always easy to see the transitions between paragraphs. This, however, should not mask the incredible value of this book. The division between chapters and sub-chapters is much more clear, which makes the book easy to use as a reference. Overall, the book contains an exceptionally rich view of psychology with an impartial discussion of viewpoints and characters. This book would certainly benefit all students of psychology.