NEO-SKEPSIS # 4:

PSYCHOLOGY AND PSEUDOSCIENCE

Abstracts

Science or pseudoscience ?: 

Manuel A. Paz y Miño, Editor, Neo-Skepsis 

The distinction between science and pseudoscience is not a mere academic problem or one that does not even deserve our attention, but its elucidation has social, economic, and even political implications. There are many disciplines to which we can question their "scientificity" but which receive the letterhead of science or in any case proto-sciences among their supporters and that of pseudoscience among their adversaries respectively, especially the majority of the members of the scientific community. Is it a difficult choice to solve? We think not. There are certain general and basic ideas —even from common sense— that can clarify for us whether this or that set of ideas or knowledge is scientific or not.

Psychoanalysis and the computerized model of the mind as pseudoscientific approaches:

Mario Bunge, Foundations of Science Unit, McGill University

Psychoanalytic ideas are mostly foolish, unstable and / or undemonstrable or refutable speculations as well as being disconnected from neurophysiology and experimental psychology. The computerized model of the mind, or rather, the family of computer models, although it seems scientific or more technological because it uses the language of computer science, it is also pseudoscientific.

On the epistemological status of psychoanalysis:

César Sparrow, Academic Department of Psychology, National Major University  San Marcos

Is psychoanalysis a science? Why? If not, could it be? How? Would it be convenient if it were a science? This article seeks to answer these questions.

Behaviorism, postmodernism and a systemic approach: Analysis of confrontation and decisive synthesis:

William Montgomery Urday, Academic Department of Psychology, National University of San Marcos

Postmodernism has a positive and a negative side, the first influencing the overcoming of reductionism and the mechanism of the reflexological paradigm, and the recognition of complexity and transdisciplinarity. The second side, in turn, passes through an obtuse, prejudiced and uninformed vision of scientific work and knowledge of objective reality that harms systematic professional action. It is indicated that behavioral science (in its interbehavioral variant) adapts its work to the positive demands of postmodernism by moving away from diachronic logic and approaching a synchronous model such as that provided by the conception of Systems Theory, and presents as evidence a comparison of the essential guidelines of the systemic approach in league with the theoretical, methodological and practical contribution to field behaviorism.

Piaget: a critical look:

Raymundo Casas Navarro, Academic Department of Linguistics, National University M. San Marcos

The purpose of this article is to criticize Piaget's theory from an epistemological point of view. First, the author draws a brief sketch of Piaget's genetic epistemology, and then shows the weak aspects of this theory. In conclusion, this document raises a strong objection against Piaget's program.

Towards a "balanced epistemology" for psychology ?:

William Montgomery Urday, Academic Department of Psychology, National Major University San Marcos

Following M. Bunge, it is suggested that there are, from a scientific perspective, certain indispensable characteristics that a good epistemology must have (in this case for psychology), which are found only in some of the options currently available. Epistemology must have at least one precise mission, be objective, be the foundation of knowing and doing, and allow us to distinguish between events and constructs.

To Neo-Skepsis # 5

To Neo-Skepsis # 3