PsyResearch
ψ   Psychology Research on the Web   



Couples needed for online psychology research


Help us grow:




Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology - Vol 37, Iss 4

Random Abstract
Quick Journal Finder:
Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology The Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology is devoted to fostering discussion at the interface of psychology, philosophy, and metatheory. The Journal addresses ontological, epistemological, ethical, and critical issues in psychological theory and inquiry as well as the implications of psychological theory and inquiry for philosophical issues.
Copyright 2017 American Psychological Association
  • Worlds within and without: Thinking otherwise about the dialogical self.
    Contra those monological, egocentric versions of the self that have come to be enshrined in much of contemporary psychology, the dialogical self (Hermans, 1996, 2012; Hermans & Kempen, 1993) lives in a region of greater multiplicity and heterogeneity, even a kind of internal otherness, wrought by the chorus of voices seeking to be heard. Valuable though dialogical self theory (DST) has been for reimagining the nature of selfhood, this article—based on a keynote lecture presented in 2016 at the 9th International Conference on the Dialogical Self in Lublin, Poland—suggests that a more explicitly “excentric” theory of the self may be warranted. Drawing on select strands of narrative psychology as well as on the work of Martin Buber, William James, and Emmanuel Levinas, among others, it is further suggested that such a theory might explore the interface between what have been termed spheres of temporality and spheres of otherness. This perspective ought not to be construed as an effort to supplant DST. On the contrary, “thinking Otherwise” about selfhood in the manner specified may be seen as a natural extension of DST’s central principles. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2017 APA, all rights reserved)
    Citation link to source

  • Carl Rogers’ and B. F. Skinner’s approaches to personal and societal improvement: A study in the psychological humanities.
    Carl Rogers and B. F. Skinner were highly successful 20th century American psychologists who founded historically important schools of psychological inquiry and practice. Their theories, research, and professional practices were embedded within but also challenged American sociocultural concerns and conventions. The focus of this article is on how their research, theories, and ideas, especially those related to the freedom and control of persons, were drawn from their own life experiences and interacted with their penchants for personal freedom versus personal control. The deeply personal bases of Rogers’ and Skinner’s contributions to psychology also are instructive with respect to several issues in the theory of psychology, including the role of values and personal interests in psychological science and practice, relationships between basic research and applied research and professional practice, the generalization of results from experimentation and research, questions concerning human agency, and the place of social advocacy and reform in psychological science and professional practice. More generally, the work reported herein demonstrates the utility of biographical inquiry in particular and the psychological humanities more generally for theoretical purposes in psychology. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2017 APA, all rights reserved)
    Citation link to source

  • Morality between nativism and behaviorism: (Innate) intersubjectivity as a response to John Mikhail’s “universal moral grammar”.
    [Correction Notice: An Erratum for this article was reported in Vol 37(4) of Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology (see record 2017-49603-002). The article was originally published online with the following incorrect title: “Morality Between Nativism and Behaviorism: From a Critical Account of the Innate ‘Universal Moral Grammar’ Thesis as Represented by John Mikhail Towards an (Innate) Intersubjectivity as the Basis of the Origin and Development of Morality.” All versions of this article have been corrected.] The thesis of an innate universal moral grammar (UMG) relies upon an analogy to the thesis of a universal grammar of the human faculty of language in linguistics. Drawing upon this faculty, John Mikhail (2011), among others, argues that we humans have an inborn moral grammar. In this article, this fascinating thesis is juxtaposed with counterperspectives from the various fields on which it is based, with substantial criticism from such fields as neurobiology, evolutionary and developmental psychology, and philosophy, leaving ample space for doubting UMG and, especially, its claimed innateness. In methodological terms, Mikhail suggested using collective evidence from the various disciplines to prove the hypothesis of an innate UMG, as there is not sufficient substantial support for UMG within each discipline alone. This multi- and interdisciplinary approach is also contested in this article. In lieu of UMG, this article proposes thinking of intersubjectivity in order to deal with the origins and development of the biological setup of human morality. In so doing, it refers to Colwyn Trevarthen’s concept of primary, secondary, and tertiary intersubjectivity, which is gaining more and more in popularity. This enables us, so runs the argument, to align morality and its development with core concepts of (developmental) psychology. Such an understanding of morality furthermore lays bare the origins of moral normativity, which is essential in order to evaluate moral behavior. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2017 APA, all rights reserved)
    Citation link to source

  • “Morality between nativism and behaviorism: (Innate) Intersubjectivity as a response to John Mikhail’s ‘universal moral grammar’”; Correction to Kirchmair (2017).
    Reports an error in "Morality Between Nativism and Behaviorism: From a Critical Account of the Innate “Universal Moral Grammar” Thesis as Represented by John Mikhail Towards an (Innate) Intersubjectivity as the Basis of the Origin and Development of Morality" by Lando Kirchmair (Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, Advanced Online Publication, Aug 24, 2017, np). The article was originally published online with the following incorrect title: “Morality Between Nativism and Behaviorism: From a Critical Account of the Innate ‘Universal Moral Grammar’ Thesis as Represented by John Mikhail Towards an (Innate) Intersubjectivity as the Basis of the Origin and Development of Morality.” All versions of this article have been corrected. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2017-36458-001.) The thesis of an innate universal moral grammar (UMG) relies upon an analogy to the thesis of a universal grammar of the human faculty of language in linguistics. Drawing upon this faculty, John Mikhail (2011), among others, argues that we humans have an inborn moral grammar. In this article, this fascinating thesis is juxtaposed with counterperspectives from the various fields on which it is based, with substantial criticism from such fields as neurobiology, evolutionary and developmental psychology, and philosophy, leaving ample space for doubting UMG and, especially, its claimed innateness. In methodological terms, Mikhail suggested using collective evidence from the various disciplines to prove the hypothesis of an innate UMG, as there is not sufficient substantial support for UMG within each discipline alone. This multi- and interdisciplinary approach is also contested in this article. In lieu of UMG, this article proposes thinking of intersubjectivity in order to deal with the origins and development of the biological setup of human morality. In so doing, it refers to Colwyn Trevarthen’s concept of primary, secondary, and tertiary intersubjectivity, which is gaining more and more in popularity. This enables us, so runs the argument, to align morality and its development with core concepts of (developmental) psychology. Such an understanding of morality furthermore lays bare the origins of moral normativity, which is essential in order to evaluate moral behavior. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2017 APA, all rights reserved)
    Citation link to source

  • News and notes.
    Presents news of interest to the Society for Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2017 APA, all rights reserved)
    Citation link to source



Back to top


Back to top