Why study the history of psycholoyg? What appears to be unique about psychology compared to other scientific disciplines with well established "paradigms"?

-- Dina Zaccaro (dizzy617@msn.com), October 25, 2001

Answers

The history of every academic discipline is different -- different people, different places, different times, different issues. One cannot study the history of one science and then assume that the same will be true for all of them. Have a look at a basic textbook in the history of psychology. Ray Fancher's _Pioneers of Psychology_ is particularly readable.

-- Christopher Green (christo@yorku.ca), October 25, 2001.

Hi Dina, 1st queston, I think one should study the history of psychology for several reasons. You will find the investigation of psychi is circular through history instead of linear, and so time spent in the archives will reward you with a depth of understanding. It saves you from re-inventing the wheel. It also provides you with a broad perspective on the discipline. Also, it provides employment oppertunities for those who monitor this site; that's very important. From a purely pragmatic point of view, knowing the history of your area can save you wasting the time of your subjects, and it can save you wasting your research dollar going over already plowed ground. Now for #2, what other "scientific disciplines" have well established "paradigms"? I mean, if you are engaged in research it seems by definition you are straining to break out of the "paradigm" whatever that is (I'm aware of the current popular use of the term.), but you know, what if that "paradigm" stuff is just a historiographical theory? Try asking a lab-living research biologist what is unique about their "paradigm" compared to psychology. Good Luck, David

-- david clark (doclark@yorku.ca), October 25, 2001.